-
A Possible Problem with the Sunspot Number
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Sunspots are areas of strong magnetic fields driven by a convective dynamo. Rudolf Wolf devised his Sunspot Number (SN) series to describe its variation with time. Most other solar phenomena vary in concert with SN, in particular the microwave radiation. During the interval 2014-Jul to 2015-Dec, the variation of the SN with the microwave flux (e.g. F10.7) was anomalous, although microwave flux did…
▽ More
Sunspots are areas of strong magnetic fields driven by a convective dynamo. Rudolf Wolf devised his Sunspot Number (SN) series to describe its variation with time. Most other solar phenomena vary in concert with SN, in particular the microwave radiation. During the interval 2014-Jul to 2015-Dec, the variation of the SN with the microwave flux (e.g. F10.7) was anomalous, although microwave flux did not exhibit any anomaly with respect to the solar magnetic field measured by the HMI instrument on the SDO spacecraft. This points to a possible problem with the derivation of the SN using the 148,714 reports of sunspot observations received by the World Data Center Solar Influences (SIDC/SILSO at ROB) since 2011 (when the last public raw data was released). The unavailability of the raw data since then, contrary to avowed open data policy of ROB, prevents independent assessment and possible correction of the anomaly. We urge ROB to make the raw data available.
△ Less
Submitted 13 May, 2025;
originally announced May 2025.
-
Re-calibration of the Sunspot Number: Status Report
Authors:
F. Clette,
L. Lefèvre,
T. Chatzistergos,
H. Hayakawa,
V. M. Carrasco,
R. Arlt,
E. W. Cliver,
T. Dudok de Wit,
T. Friedli,
N. Karachik,
G. Kopp,
M. Lockwood,
S. Mathieu,
A. Muñoz-Jaramillo,
M. Owens,
D. Pesnell,
A. Pevtsov,
L. Svalgaard,
I. G. Usoskin,
L. van Driel-Gesztelyi,
J. M. Vaquero
Abstract:
We report progress on the ongoing recalibration of the Wolf sunspot number (SN) and Group sunspot number (GN) following the release of version 2.0 of SN in 2015. This report constitutes both an update of the efforts reported in the 2016 Topical Issue of Solar Physics and a summary of work by the International Space Science Institute (ISSI) International Team formed in 2017 to develop optimal SN an…
▽ More
We report progress on the ongoing recalibration of the Wolf sunspot number (SN) and Group sunspot number (GN) following the release of version 2.0 of SN in 2015. This report constitutes both an update of the efforts reported in the 2016 Topical Issue of Solar Physics and a summary of work by the International Space Science Institute (ISSI) International Team formed in 2017 to develop optimal SN and GN re-construction methods while continuing to expand the historical sunspot number database. Significant progress has been made on the database side while more work is needed to bring the various proposed SN and (primarily) GN reconstruction methods closer to maturity, after which the new reconstructions (or combinations thereof) can be compared with (a) ``benchmark'' expectations for any normalization scheme (e.g., a general increase in observer normalization factors going back in time), and (b) independent proxy data series such as F10.7 and the daily range of variations of Earth's undisturbed magnetic field. New versions of the underlying databases for SN and GN will shortly become available for years through 2022 and we anticipate the release of next versions of these two time series in 2024.
△ Less
Submitted 5 January, 2023;
originally announced January 2023.
-
Uniting The Sun's Hale Magnetic Cycle and `Extended Solar Cycle' Paradigms
Authors:
Scott W. McIntosh,
Phillip H. Scherrer,
Leif Svalgaard,
Robert J. Leamon
Abstract:
Through meticulous daily observation of the Sun's large-scale magnetic field the Wilcox Solar Observatory (WSO) has catalogued two magnetic (Hale) cycles of solar activity. Those two (~22-year long) Hale cycles have yielded four ($\sim$11-year long) sunspot cycles (numbers 21 through 24). Recent research has highlighted the persistence of the "Extended Solar Cycle" (ESC) and its connection to the…
▽ More
Through meticulous daily observation of the Sun's large-scale magnetic field the Wilcox Solar Observatory (WSO) has catalogued two magnetic (Hale) cycles of solar activity. Those two (~22-year long) Hale cycles have yielded four ($\sim$11-year long) sunspot cycles (numbers 21 through 24). Recent research has highlighted the persistence of the "Extended Solar Cycle" (ESC) and its connection to the fundamental Hale Cycle - albeit through a host of proxies resulting from image analysis of the solar photosphere, chromosphere and corona. This short manuscript presents the correspondence of the ESC, the surface toroidal magnetic field evolution, and the evolution of the Hale Cycle. As Sunspot Cycle 25 begins, interest in observationally mapping the Hale and Extended cycles could not be higher given potential predictive capability that synoptic scale observations can provide.
△ Less
Submitted 13 September, 2022; v1 submitted 18 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
Several Populations of Sunspot Group Numbers -- Resolving a Conundrum
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
The long-standing disparity between the sunspot number record and the Hoyt and Schatten (1998, H&S) Group Sunspot Number series was initially resolved by the Clette et al. (2014) revision of the sunspot number and the group number series. The revisions resulted in a flurry of dissenting group number series while the revised sunspot number series was generally accepted. Thus, the disparity persiste…
▽ More
The long-standing disparity between the sunspot number record and the Hoyt and Schatten (1998, H&S) Group Sunspot Number series was initially resolved by the Clette et al. (2014) revision of the sunspot number and the group number series. The revisions resulted in a flurry of dissenting group number series while the revised sunspot number series was generally accepted. Thus, the disparity persisted and confusion reigned, with the choice of solar activity dataset continuing to be a free parameter. A number of workshops and follow-up collaborative efforts by the community have not yet brought clarity. We review here several lines of evidence that validate the original revisions put forward by Clette et al. (2014) and suggest that the perceived conundrum no longer need to delay acceptance and general use of the revised series. We argue that the solar observations constitute several distinct populations with different properties which explain the various discontinuities in the series. This is supported by several proxies: diurnal variation of the geomagnetic field, geomagnetic signature of the strength of the heliomagnetic field, and variation of radionuclides. The Waldmeier effect shows that the sunspot number scale has not changed over the last 270 years and a mistaken scale factor between observers Wolf and Wolfer explains the disparity beginning in 1882 between the sunspot number and the H&S reconstruction of the group number. Observations with replica of 18th century telescopes (with similar optical flaws) validate the early sunspot number scale; while a reconstruction of the group number with monthly resolution (with many more degrees of freedom) validate the size of Solar Cycle 11 given by the revised series that the dissenting series fail to meet.
△ Less
Submitted 10 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Calibration of the Sunspot and Group Numbers Using the Waldmeier Effect
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
David H. Hathaway
Abstract:
The Waldmeier Effect is the observation that the rise time of a sunspot cycle varies inversely with the cycle amplitude: strong cycles rise to their maximum faster than weak cycles. The shape of the cycle and thus the rise time does not depend on the scale factor of the sunspot number and can thus be used to verify the constancy of the scale factor with time as already noted by Wolfer (1902) and W…
▽ More
The Waldmeier Effect is the observation that the rise time of a sunspot cycle varies inversely with the cycle amplitude: strong cycles rise to their maximum faster than weak cycles. The shape of the cycle and thus the rise time does not depend on the scale factor of the sunspot number and can thus be used to verify the constancy of the scale factor with time as already noted by Wolfer (1902) and Waldmeier (1978). We extend their analysis until the present using the new SILSO sunspot number (version 2) and group number and confirm that the scale factors have not varied significantly the past 250 years. The effect is also found in sunspot areas, in an EUV (and F10.7) proxy (the daily range of a geomagnetic variation), and in Cosmic Ray Modulation. The result is that solar activity reached similar high values in every one of the (17th?) 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, supporting the finding that there has been no modern Grand Maximum.
△ Less
Submitted 2 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Prediction of Solar Cycle 25
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Prediction of solar cycle is an important goal of Solar Physics both because it serves as a touchstone for our understanding of the sun and also because of its societal value for a space faring civilization. The task is difficult and progress is slow. Schatten et al. (1978) suggested that the magnitude of the magnetic field in the polar regions of the sun near solar minimum could serve as a precur…
▽ More
Prediction of solar cycle is an important goal of Solar Physics both because it serves as a touchstone for our understanding of the sun and also because of its societal value for a space faring civilization. The task is difficult and progress is slow. Schatten et al. (1978) suggested that the magnitude of the magnetic field in the polar regions of the sun near solar minimum could serve as a precursor for the evolution and amplitude of the following solar cycle. Since then, this idea has been the foundation of somewhat successful predictions of the size of the last four cycles, especially of the unexpectedly weak solar cycle 24 ("the weakest in 100 years"). Direct measurements of the polar magnetic fields are available since the 1970s and we have just passed the solar minimum prior to solar cycle 25, so a further test of the polar field precursor method is now possible. The predicted size of the new cycle 25 is 128$\pm$10 (on the new sunspot number version 2 scale), slightly larger than the previous cycle.
△ Less
Submitted 5 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
Calibration of the Total Solar Irradiance Data Record
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Solar surface magnetic field seems to be able to explain variations in Total Solar Irradiance on timescales from hours to decades. Using magnetograms from spacecraft (MDI and HMI) and ground-based observatories (MWO and WSO) I build a composite dataset of the Total Line-of-Sight Unsigned Magnetic Flux over the solar disk stretching back to 1976, validated by excellent correlations with the solar m…
▽ More
Solar surface magnetic field seems to be able to explain variations in Total Solar Irradiance on timescales from hours to decades. Using magnetograms from spacecraft (MDI and HMI) and ground-based observatories (MWO and WSO) I build a composite dataset of the Total Line-of-Sight Unsigned Magnetic Flux over the solar disk stretching back to 1976, validated by excellent correlations with the solar microwave flux (F10.7) and the Sunspot Group Number. Direct measurements of TSI by space borne sensors have been carried out since late 1978. The early instruments were plagued by scattered light entering the aperture, but this construction flaw can be corrected for. At the AGU 2018 meeting, a new TSI composite has been proposed based on a novel mathematical method vetted by representatives from all current and most past TSI instruments. Although an 'official' release of the dataset has not been offered yet, a preliminary version is available. Anticipating that any last-minute changes might be minor, I compare this new version with the magnetic flux composite. It is clear that we have two TSI populations: values before 1993 that are seriously too low and values from 1993 onwards. I elect to normalize the magnetic flux (the driver of variations of TSI) to a New TSI using the regression equation for the recent population with the smallest uncertainty. With this normalization, there is now total agreement between the variation of the magnetic flux and of the New TSI as well as with the F10.7 and Group Number proxies. We now have two choices: (1) the Sun underwent a dramatic change in how its magnetic field drives variation of TSI or (2) the New Consensus TSI reconstruction does not work and the new dataset is premature and not useful neither for solar nor for climate research. Following David Hume, we should always believe whatever would be the lesser miracle, which in our case would be choice (2).
△ Less
Submitted 21 December, 2018;
originally announced December 2018.
-
Up to Nine Millennia of Multimessenger Solar Activity
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
A nine-millennia reconstruction of decadal sunspot numbers derived from 10Be and 14C terrestrial archives for 6755 BC to 1885 AD has been extended to the present using several other messengers (Observed Sunspot Number, Group Number, range of the diurnal variation of the geomagnetic field, and the InterDiurnal Variation of the geomagnetic Ring Current) and scaled to the modern SILSO Version 2 sunsp…
▽ More
A nine-millennia reconstruction of decadal sunspot numbers derived from 10Be and 14C terrestrial archives for 6755 BC to 1885 AD has been extended to the present using several other messengers (Observed Sunspot Number, Group Number, range of the diurnal variation of the geomagnetic field, and the InterDiurnal Variation of the geomagnetic Ring Current) and scaled to the modern SILSO Version 2 sunspot number. We find that there has been no secular up tick of activity the last three hundred years and that recent activity has not been out of the ordinary. There is a sharp 87.6-year peak in the power spectrum, but no significant power at the Hallstatt 2300-year period. The reconciliation of the cosmogenic record with the modern sunspot record could be an important step to providing a vetted solar activity record for the use in climate research.
△ Less
Submitted 29 October, 2018;
originally announced October 2018.
-
Assessment of the Failure of Active Days Fraction Method of Sunspot Group Number Reconstructions
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Kenneth H. Schatten
Abstract:
We identify several pairs of 'equivalent' observers defined as observers with equal or nearly equal 'observational threshold' areas of sunspots on the solar disk as determined by the 'Active Days Fraction' method [e.g. Willamo et al., 2017]. For such pairs of observers, the ADF-method would be expected to map the actually observed sunspot group numbers for the individual observers to two reconstru…
▽ More
We identify several pairs of 'equivalent' observers defined as observers with equal or nearly equal 'observational threshold' areas of sunspots on the solar disk as determined by the 'Active Days Fraction' method [e.g. Willamo et al., 2017]. For such pairs of observers, the ADF-method would be expected to map the actually observed sunspot group numbers for the individual observers to two reconstructed series that are very nearly equal and (it is claimed) represent 'real' solar activity without arbitrary choices and deleterious, error-accumulating 'daisy-chaining'. We show that this goal has not been achieved (for the critical period at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th), rendering the ADF-methodology suspect and not reliable nor useful for studying the long-term variation of solar activity.
△ Less
Submitted 4 June, 2017;
originally announced June 2017.
-
Gustav Spörer Was Not a Perfect Observer: Failure of the Active Day Fraction Reconstruction of Sunspot Group Numbers
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
We show that the Active-Day-Fraction calibration method (Willamo et al. [2017]) fails for Gustav Spörer's sunspot group observations. Spörer was labeled a 'perfect observer' on account of his 'observational threshold SS area' being determined to be equal to zero, based on the assumption that the observer can see and report all the groups with the area larger than SS, while missing all smaller grou…
▽ More
We show that the Active-Day-Fraction calibration method (Willamo et al. [2017]) fails for Gustav Spörer's sunspot group observations. Spörer was labeled a 'perfect observer' on account of his 'observational threshold SS area' being determined to be equal to zero, based on the assumption that the observer can see and report all the groups with the area larger than SS, while missing all smaller groups. So, Spörer could apparently, according to the ADF calibration method, see and report all groups, regardless of size and should never miss any. This suggests a very direct test: compute the yearly average group count for both Spörer and the 'perfect observer' exemplar, the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO), and compare them. They should be identical within a reasonable (very small) error margin. We find that they are not and that RGO generally reported 45% more groups than Spörer, and that therefore, the ADF-method is not generally applicable
△ Less
Submitted 17 May, 2017;
originally announced May 2017.
-
Sunspot Group Numbers Since 1900 and Implications for the Long-term Record of Solar Activity
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Kenneth H. Schatten
Abstract:
Recent work on improving and revising estimates of solar activity [Clette et al., 2014] has resulted in renewed interest in what has been called the longest running 'Science Experiment'. We compare four reconstructions of solar activity as reflected in the number of sunspot groups ('active regions') constructed by different authors using very different methods. We concentrate on the period since A…
▽ More
Recent work on improving and revising estimates of solar activity [Clette et al., 2014] has resulted in renewed interest in what has been called the longest running 'Science Experiment'. We compare four reconstructions of solar activity as reflected in the number of sunspot groups ('active regions') constructed by different authors using very different methods. We concentrate on the period since AD 1900 where the underlying solar and geomagnetic data are plentiful and of sufficient quality and find that all four methods yield essentially the same Sunspot Group Number series. We take that as indicating that protracted and pernicious criticisms of the individual methods are neither fruitful nor helpful and we suggest that future efforts be directed towards understanding the specific reasons why the methods give discordant results for centuries prior to the 20th. The main area of disagreement occurs during the last 25 years of the 19th century and feeds back into the time prior to that. The solar Extreme Ultraviolet flux can be reconstructed since the 1740s [Svalgaard, 2016] and with suitable scaling fits the Svalgaard & Schatten [2016] Sunspot Group Number series since 1865 very well, so we argue that the discordant group series have problems once we move out of the 20th century, and that the community should concentrate on finding out what those are, so a true and useful consensus can emerge.
△ Less
Submitted 4 May, 2017;
originally announced May 2017.
-
On the Sunspot Group Number Reconstruction: The Backbone Method Revisited
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Kenneth H. Schatten
Abstract:
We discuss recent papers very critical of our Group Sunspot Number Series (Svalgaard & Schatten [2016]). Unfortunately, we cannot support any of the concerns they raise. We first show that almost always there is simple proportionality between the group counts by different observers and that taking the small, occasional, non-linearities into account makes very little difference. Among other example…
▽ More
We discuss recent papers very critical of our Group Sunspot Number Series (Svalgaard & Schatten [2016]). Unfortunately, we cannot support any of the concerns they raise. We first show that almost always there is simple proportionality between the group counts by different observers and that taking the small, occasional, non-linearities into account makes very little difference. Among other examples: we verify that the RGO group count was drifting the first twenty years of observations. We then show that our group count matches the diurnal variation of the geomagnetic field with high fidelity, and that the heliospheric magnetic field derived from geomagnetic data is consistent with our group number series. We evaluate the 'correction matrix' approach [Usoskin et al. 2016] and show that it fails to reproduce the observational data. We clarify the notion of daisy-chaining and point out that our group number series has no daisy-chaining for the period 1794-1996 and therefore no accumulation of errors over that span. We compare with the cosmic ray record for the last 400+ years and find good agreement. We note that the Active Day Fraction method (of Usoskin et al.) has the fundamental problem that at sunspot maximum, every day is an 'active day' so ADF is nearly always unity and thus does not carry information about the statistics of high solar activity. This 'information shadow' occurs for even moderate group numbers and thus need to be extrapolated to higher activity. The ADF method also fails for 'equivalent observers' who should register the same group counts, but do not. We conclude that the criticism of Svalgaard & Schatten [2016] is invalid and detrimental to progress in the important field of long-term variation of solar activity.
△ Less
Submitted 25 September, 2017; v1 submitted 24 April, 2017;
originally announced April 2017.
-
A Revised Collection of Sunspot Group Numbers
Authors:
J. M. Vaquero,
L. Svalgaard,
V. M. S. Carrasco,
F. Clette,
L. Lefèvre,
M. C. Gallego,
R. Arlt,
A. J. P. Aparicio,
J. -G. Richard,
R. Howe
Abstract:
We describe a revised collection of the number of sunspot groups from 1610 to the present. This new collection is based on the work of Hoyt and Schatten (Solar Phys. 179, 189, 1998). The main changes are the elimination of a considerable number of observations during the Maunder Minimum (hereafter, MM) and the inclusion of several long series of observations. Numerous minor changes are also descri…
▽ More
We describe a revised collection of the number of sunspot groups from 1610 to the present. This new collection is based on the work of Hoyt and Schatten (Solar Phys. 179, 189, 1998). The main changes are the elimination of a considerable number of observations during the Maunder Minimum (hereafter, MM) and the inclusion of several long series of observations. Numerous minor changes are also described. Moreover, we have calculated the active-day percentage during the MM from this new collection as a reliable index of the solar activity. Thus, the level of solar activity obtained in this work is greater than the level obtained using the original Hoyt and Schatten data, although it remains compatible with a grand minimum of solar activity. The new collection is available in digital format.
△ Less
Submitted 15 September, 2016;
originally announced September 2016.
-
A Recount of Sunspot Groups on Staudach's Drawings
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
We have examined the more than 1100 drawings of the solar disk made by the German astronomy amateur Johann Caspar Staudach during 1749-1799 and counted the spots on each image. Using the modern perception of how to group spots into active regions we regrouped the spots as a modern observer would. The resulting number of groups was found to be on average 25% higher than the first count of groups pe…
▽ More
We have examined the more than 1100 drawings of the solar disk made by the German astronomy amateur Johann Caspar Staudach during 1749-1799 and counted the spots on each image. Using the modern perception of how to group spots into active regions we regrouped the spots as a modern observer would. The resulting number of groups was found to be on average 25% higher than the first count of groups performed by Wolf in 1857, and used by Hoyt and Schatten in their construction of the Group Sunspot Number. Compared to other observers at the time, Staudach's drawings have a very low average number, ~2, of spots per group, possibly indicating an inferior telescope likely suffering from spherical and chromatic aberration as would typical of amateur telescopes of the day. We have initiated an ongoing project aiming at observing sunspots with antique telescopes having similar defects in order to determine the factor necessary to bring the Staudach observations onto a modern scale.
△ Less
Submitted 4 November, 2015;
originally announced November 2015.
-
The Effect of Sunspot Weighting
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Marco Cagnotti,
Sergio Cortesi
Abstract:
Waldmeier in 1947 introduced a weighting (on a scale from 1 to 5) of the sunspot count made at Zurich and its auxiliary station Locarno, whereby larger spots were counted more than once. This counting method inflates the relative sunspot number over that which corresponds to the scale set by Wolfer and Brunner. Svalgaard re-counted some 60,000 sunspots on drawings from the reference station Locarn…
▽ More
Waldmeier in 1947 introduced a weighting (on a scale from 1 to 5) of the sunspot count made at Zurich and its auxiliary station Locarno, whereby larger spots were counted more than once. This counting method inflates the relative sunspot number over that which corresponds to the scale set by Wolfer and Brunner. Svalgaard re-counted some 60,000 sunspots on drawings from the reference station Locarno and determined that the number of sunspots reported were 'over counted' by 44% on average, leading to an inflation (measured by a weight factor) in excess of 1.2 for high solar activity. In a double-blind parallel counting by the Locarno observer Cagnotti, we determined that Svalgaard's count closely matches that of Cagnotti's, allowing us to determine the daily weight factor since 2003 (and sporadically before). We find that a simple empirical equation fits the observed weight factors well, and use that fit to estimate the weight factor for each month back to the introduction of weighting in 1947 and thus to be able to correct for the over-count and to reduce sunspot counting without weighting to the Wolfer method in use from 1893 onwards.
△ Less
Submitted 4 July, 2015;
originally announced July 2015.
-
Does Building a Relative Sunspot Number Make Sense? A Qualified 'Yes'
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Recent research has demonstrated that the number of sunspots per group ('active region') has been decreasing over the last two or three solar cycles and that the classical Relative Sunspot Number (SSN) no longer is a good representation of solar magnetic activity such as revealed by e.g. the F10.7 cm microwave flux. The SSN is derived under the assumption that the number of spots per group is cons…
▽ More
Recent research has demonstrated that the number of sunspots per group ('active region') has been decreasing over the last two or three solar cycles and that the classical Relative Sunspot Number (SSN) no longer is a good representation of solar magnetic activity such as revealed by e.g. the F10.7 cm microwave flux. The SSN is derived under the assumption that the number of spots per group is constant (in fact, nominally equal to 10). When this is no longer the case (the ratio is approaching 5, only half of its nominal value) the question arises how to construct a sunspot number series that takes that into account. We propose to harmonize the SSN with the sunspot Group Count that has been shown to follow F10.7 very well, but also to include the day-to-day variations of the spot count in order to preserve both long-term and short-term variability.
△ Less
Submitted 18 June, 2015;
originally announced June 2015.
-
Reconstruction of Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Flux 1740-2015
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Solar Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) radiation creates the conducting E-layer of the ionosphere, mainly by photo ionization of molecular Oxygen. Solar heating of the ionosphere creates thermal winds which by dynamo action induce an electric field driving an electric current having a magnetic effect observable on the ground, as was discovered by G. Graham in 1722. The current rises and sets with the Sun…
▽ More
Solar Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) radiation creates the conducting E-layer of the ionosphere, mainly by photo ionization of molecular Oxygen. Solar heating of the ionosphere creates thermal winds which by dynamo action induce an electric field driving an electric current having a magnetic effect observable on the ground, as was discovered by G. Graham in 1722. The current rises and sets with the Sun and thus causes a readily observable diurnal variation of the geomagnetic field, allowing us the deduce the conductivity and thus the EUV flux as far back as reliable magnetic data reach. High-quality data go back to the 'Magnetic Crusade' of the 1830s and less reliable, but still usable, data are available for portions of the hundred years before that. J.R. Wolf and, independently, J.-A. Gautier discovered the dependence of the diurnal variation on solar activity, and today we understand and can invert that relationship to construct a reliable record of the EUV flux from the geomagnetic record. We compare that to the F10.7 flux and the sunspot number, and find that the reconstructed EUV flux reproduces the F10.7 flux with great accuracy. On the other hand, it appears that the Relative Sunspot Number as currently defined is beginning to no longer be a faithful representation of solar magnetic activity, at least as measured by the EUV and related indices. The reconstruction suggests that the EUV flux reaches the same low (but non-zero) value at every sunspot minimum (possibly including Grand Minima), representing an invariant 'solar magnetic ground state'.
△ Less
Submitted 14 June, 2015;
originally announced June 2015.
-
Reconstruction of the Sunspot Group Number: the Backbone Method
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Kennuth H. Schatten
Abstract:
We have reconstructed the sunspot group count, not by comparisons with other reconstructions and correcting those where they were deemed to be deficient, but by a re-assessment of original sources. The resulting series is a pure solar index and does not rely on input from other proxies, e.g. radionuclides, auroral sightings, or geomagnetic records. 'Backboning' the data sets, our chosen method, pr…
▽ More
We have reconstructed the sunspot group count, not by comparisons with other reconstructions and correcting those where they were deemed to be deficient, but by a re-assessment of original sources. The resulting series is a pure solar index and does not rely on input from other proxies, e.g. radionuclides, auroral sightings, or geomagnetic records. 'Backboning' the data sets, our chosen method, provides substance and rigidity by using long-time observers as a stiffness character. Solar activity, as defined by the Group Number, appears to reach and sustain for extended intervals of time the same level in each of the last three centuries since 1700 and the past several decades do not seem to have been exceptionally active, contrary to what is often claimed.
△ Less
Submitted 2 June, 2015;
originally announced June 2015.
-
Solar Sector Structure
Authors:
Hugh Hudson,
Leif Svalgaard,
Iain Hannah
Abstract:
The interplanetary magnetic field near has a characteristic "sector" structure that reflects its polarity relative to the solar direction. Typically we observe large-scale coherence in these directions, with two or four "away" or "towards" sectors per solar rotation, from any platform in deep space and near the ecliptic plane. In a simple picture, this morphology simply reflects the idea that the…
▽ More
The interplanetary magnetic field near has a characteristic "sector" structure that reflects its polarity relative to the solar direction. Typically we observe large-scale coherence in these directions, with two or four "away" or "towards" sectors per solar rotation, from any platform in deep space and near the ecliptic plane. In a simple picture, this morphology simply reflects the idea that the sources of the interplanetary field lie mainly in or near the Sun, and that the solar-wind flow enforces a radial component in this field. Although defined strictly via the interplanetary field near one AU, recent evidence confirms that this pattern also appears clearly at the level of the photosphere, with signatures including not only the large-scale structures (e.g., the streamers) but also highly concentrated fields such as those found in sunspots and even solar flares. This association with small-scale fields strengthens at the Hale sector boundary, defining the Hale boundary as the one for which the polarity switch matches that of the leading-to-following polarity alternation in the sunspots of a given hemisphere.
△ Less
Submitted 15 March, 2015;
originally announced March 2015.
-
Revisiting the Sunspot Number
Authors:
Frédéric Clette,
Leif Svalgaard,
José M. Vaquero,
Edward W. Cliver
Abstract:
Our knowledge of the long-term evolution of solar activity and of its primary modulation, the 11-year cycle, largely depends on a single direct observational record: the visual sunspot counts that retrace the last 4 centuries, since the invention of the astronomical telescope. Currently, this activity index is available in two main forms: the International Sunspot Number initiated by R. Wolf in 18…
▽ More
Our knowledge of the long-term evolution of solar activity and of its primary modulation, the 11-year cycle, largely depends on a single direct observational record: the visual sunspot counts that retrace the last 4 centuries, since the invention of the astronomical telescope. Currently, this activity index is available in two main forms: the International Sunspot Number initiated by R. Wolf in 1849 and the Group Number constructed more recently by Hoyt and Schatten (1998a,b). Unfortunately, those two series do not match by various aspects, inducing confusions and contradictions when used in crucial contemporary studies of the solar dynamo or of the solar forcing on the Earth climate. Recently, new efforts have been undertaken to diagnose and correct flaws and biases affecting both sunspot series, in the framework of a series of dedicated Sunspot Number Workshops. Here, we present a global overview of our current understanding of the sunspot number calibration. While the early part of the sunspot record before 1800 is still characterized by large uncertainties due to poorly observed periods, the more recent sunspot numbers are mainly affected by three main inhomogeneities: in 1880-1915 for the Group Number and in 1947 and 1980-2014 for the Sunspot Number. The newly corrected series clearly indicates a progressive decline of solar activity before the onset of the Maunder Minimum, while the slowly rising trend of the activity after the Maunder Minimum is strongly reduced, suggesting that by the mid 18th century, solar activity had already returned to the level of those observed in recent solar cycles in the 20th century. We finally conclude with future prospects opened by this epochal revision of the Sunspot Number, the first one since Wolf himself, and its reconciliation with the Group Number, a long-awaited modernization that will feed solar cycle research into the 21st century.
△ Less
Submitted 11 July, 2014;
originally announced July 2014.
-
Errors in Scale Values for Magnetic Elements for Helsinki
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Using several lines of evidence we show that the scale values of the geomagnetic variometers operating in Helsinki in the 19th century were not constant throughout the years of operation 1844-1897. Specifically, the adopted scale value of the Horizontal Force variometer appears to be too low by ~30% during the years 1866-1874.5 and the adopted scale value of the Declination variometer appears to b…
▽ More
Using several lines of evidence we show that the scale values of the geomagnetic variometers operating in Helsinki in the 19th century were not constant throughout the years of operation 1844-1897. Specifically, the adopted scale value of the Horizontal Force variometer appears to be too low by ~30% during the years 1866-1874.5 and the adopted scale value of the Declination variometer appears to be too low by a factor of ~2 during the interval 1885.8-1887.5. Reconstructing the Heliospheric Magnetic Field strength from geomagnetic data has reached a stage where a reliable reconstruction is possible using even just a single geomagnetic data set of hourly or daily values. Before such reconstructions can be accepted as reliable, the underlying data must be calibrated correctly. It is thus mandatory that the Helsinki data be corrected. Such correction has been satisfactorily carried out and the HMF strength is now well constrained back to 1845.
△ Less
Submitted 11 March, 2014;
originally announced March 2014.
-
Asymmetric Solar Polar Field Reversals
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Yohsuke Kamide
Abstract:
The solar polar fields reverse because magnetic flux from decaying sunspots moves towards the poles, with a preponderance of flux from the trailing spots. Let us assume that there is a strong asymmetry in the sense that all activity is in the Northern Hemisphere, then that excess flux will move to the North Pole and reverse that pole, while nothing happens in the South. If later on, there is a lot…
▽ More
The solar polar fields reverse because magnetic flux from decaying sunspots moves towards the poles, with a preponderance of flux from the trailing spots. Let us assume that there is a strong asymmetry in the sense that all activity is in the Northern Hemisphere, then that excess flux will move to the North Pole and reverse that pole, while nothing happens in the South. If later on, there is a lot of activity in the South, then that flux will help reverse the South Pole. In this way, we get two humps in solar activity and a corresponding difference in time of reversals. Such difference was first noted by Babcock (1959) from the very first observation of polar field reversal just after the maximum of the strongly asymmetric solar cycle 19. At that time, the Southern Hemisphere was most active before sunspot maximum and the South Pole duly reversed first, followed by the Northern Hemisphere more than a year later, when that hemisphere was most active. Solar cycles since then have had the opposite asymmetry, with the Northern Hemisphere being most active early in the cycle. Polar field reversals for these cycles have as expected happened first in the North. This is especially noteworthy for the present solar cycle 24. We suggest that the association of two peaks of solar activity when separated by hemispheres with correspondingly different times of polar field reversals is a general feature of the cycle.
△ Less
Submitted 9 July, 2012;
originally announced July 2012.
-
Geomagnetic Semiannual Variation Is Not Overestimated and Is Not an Artifact of Systematic Solar Hemispheric Asymmetry
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Mursula et al. [2011] (MTL11) suggest that there is a 22-year variation in solar wind activity that coupled with the variation in heliographic latitude of the Earth during the year, gives rise to an apparent semiannual variation of geomagnetic activity in averages obtained over several solar cycles. They conclude that the observed semiannual variation is seriously overestimated and is largely an a…
▽ More
Mursula et al. [2011] (MTL11) suggest that there is a 22-year variation in solar wind activity that coupled with the variation in heliographic latitude of the Earth during the year, gives rise to an apparent semiannual variation of geomagnetic activity in averages obtained over several solar cycles. They conclude that the observed semiannual variation is seriously overestimated and is largely an artifact of this inferred 22-year variation. We show: (1) that there is no systematically alternating annual variation of geomagnetic activity or of the solar driver, changing with the polarity of the solar polar fields, (2) that the universal time variation of geomagnetic activity at all times have the characteristic imprint of the equinoctial hypothesis rather than that of the axial hypothesis required by the suggestion of MTL11, and (3) that the semiannual variation is not an artifact, is not overestimated, and does not need revision.
△ Less
Submitted 16 May, 2011;
originally announced May 2011.
-
Flaring Solar Hale Sector Boundaries
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Iain G. Hannah
Abstract:
Magnetic fields and the occurrence of flares and microflares are strongly concentrated near that portion (the Hale boundary) in each solar hemisphere where the change in magnetic sector polarity is the same as that between leading and following sunspot polarities in active regions.
Magnetic fields and the occurrence of flares and microflares are strongly concentrated near that portion (the Hale boundary) in each solar hemisphere where the change in magnetic sector polarity is the same as that between leading and following sunspot polarities in active regions.
△ Less
Submitted 15 October, 2010; v1 submitted 13 October, 2010;
originally announced October 2010.
-
Calibration of Sunspot Numbers
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
Waldmeier [1971] found a very tight relationship between the F10.7 solar radio flux and the sunspot number and suggested using the flux for an objective calibration of the sunspot number. He suggested that if this relationship changed later on, the sunspot number should be re-calibrated, assuming that the calibration must have drifted with time. I repeat his analysis using data up to the present a…
▽ More
Waldmeier [1971] found a very tight relationship between the F10.7 solar radio flux and the sunspot number and suggested using the flux for an objective calibration of the sunspot number. He suggested that if this relationship changed later on, the sunspot number should be re-calibrated, assuming that the calibration must have drifted with time. I repeat his analysis using data up to the present and it is, indeed, clear that the relationship has changed significantly. This could be due to a drift of the calibration or to a secular change in the visibility of sunspots, or both.
△ Less
Submitted 28 August, 2010;
originally announced August 2010.
-
Updating the Historical Sunspot Record
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard
Abstract:
We review the evidence for the argument that Rudolf Wolf's calibration of the Sunspot Number is likely to be correct and that Max Waldmeier introduced an upwards jump in the sunspot number in 1945. The combined effect of these adjustments suggests that there has been no secular change in the sunspot number since coming out of the Maunder Minimum ~1700.
We review the evidence for the argument that Rudolf Wolf's calibration of the Sunspot Number is likely to be correct and that Max Waldmeier introduced an upwards jump in the sunspot number in 1945. The combined effect of these adjustments suggests that there has been no secular change in the sunspot number since coming out of the Maunder Minimum ~1700.
△ Less
Submitted 24 March, 2010;
originally announced March 2010.
-
The Solar Microwave Flux and the Sunspot Number
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Hugh S. Hudson
Abstract:
The solar F10.7 index is has been a reliable and sensitive activity index since 1947. As with other indices, it has been showing unusual behavior in the Cycle 23/24 minimum. The origins of the solar microwave flux lie in a variety of features, and in two main emission mechanisms: free-free and gyroresonance. In past solar cycles F10.7 has correlated well with the sunspot number SSN. We find that t…
▽ More
The solar F10.7 index is has been a reliable and sensitive activity index since 1947. As with other indices, it has been showing unusual behavior in the Cycle 23/24 minimum. The origins of the solar microwave flux lie in a variety of features, and in two main emission mechanisms: free-free and gyroresonance. In past solar cycles F10.7 has correlated well with the sunspot number SSN. We find that this correlation has broken down in Cycle~23, confirming this with Japanese fixed-frequency radiometric microwave data.
△ Less
Submitted 22 March, 2010;
originally announced March 2010.
-
Heliospheric Magnetic Field 1835-2009
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Edward W. Cliver
Abstract:
We use recently acquired geomagnetic archival data to extend our long-term reconstruction of the HMF strength. The 1835-2009 HMF series is based on an updated and substantiated IDV series from 1872-onwards and on Bartels' extension, by proxy, of his u-series from 1835-1871. The new IDV series, termed IDV09, has excellent agreement (R^2 = 0.98; RMS = 0.3 nT) with the earlier IDV05 series, and als…
▽ More
We use recently acquired geomagnetic archival data to extend our long-term reconstruction of the HMF strength. The 1835-2009 HMF series is based on an updated and substantiated IDV series from 1872-onwards and on Bartels' extension, by proxy, of his u-series from 1835-1871. The new IDV series, termed IDV09, has excellent agreement (R^2 = 0.98; RMS = 0.3 nT) with the earlier IDV05 series, and also with the negative component of Love's extended (to 1905) Dst series (R^2 = 0.91). Of greatest importance to the community, in an area of research that has been contentious, comparison of the extended HMF series with other recent reconstructions of solar wind B for the last ~100 years yields a strong consensus between series based on geomagnetic data. Differences exist from ~1900-1910 but they are far smaller than the previous disagreement for this key interval of low solar wind B values which closely resembles current solar activity. Equally encouraging, a discrepancy with an HMF reconstruction based on 10Be data for the first half of the 20th century has largely been removed by a revised 10Be-based reconstruction published after we submitted this paper, although a remaining discrepancy for the years ~1885-1905 will need to be resolved.
△ Less
Submitted 27 March, 2010; v1 submitted 15 February, 2010;
originally announced February 2010.
-
The InterHourly-Variability (IHV) Index of Geomagnetic Activity and its Use in Deriving the Long-term Variation of Solar Wind Speed
Authors:
Leif Svalgaard,
Edward W. Cliver
Abstract:
We describe the derivation of the InterHourly Variability (IHV) index of geomagnetic activity. The IHV-index for a geomagnetic element is mechanically derived from hourly values as the sum of the unsigned differences between adjacent hours over a seven-hour interval centered on local midnight. The index is derived separately for stations in both hemispheres within six longitude sectors using onl…
▽ More
We describe the derivation of the InterHourly Variability (IHV) index of geomagnetic activity. The IHV-index for a geomagnetic element is mechanically derived from hourly values as the sum of the unsigned differences between adjacent hours over a seven-hour interval centered on local midnight. The index is derived separately for stations in both hemispheres within six longitude sectors using only local night hours. It is intended as a long-term index. Available data allows derivation of the index back well into the 19th century. On a time scale of a 27-day Bartels rotation, IHV averages for stations with corrected geomagnetic latitude less than 55 degrees are strongly correlated with midlatitude range indices. Assuming a constant calibration of the aa-index we find that observed yearly values of aa before the year 1957 are 2.9 nT too small compared to values calculated from IHV using the regression constants based on 1980-2004. We interpret this discrepancy as an indication that the calibration of the aa index is in error before 1957. There is no such problem with the ap index. Rotation averages of IHV are also strongly correlated with solar wind parameters (BV^2). On a time scale of a year combining the IHV-index and the recently-developed Inter-Diurnal Variability (IDV) index (giving B) allows determination of solar wind speed, V, from 1890-present. Over the ~120-year series, the yearly mean solar wind speed varied from a low of 303 km/s in 1902 to a high value of 545 km/s in 2003. The calculated yearly values of the product BV using B and V separately derived from IDV and IHV agree quantitatively with (completely independent) BV derived from the amplitude of the diurnal variation of the H component in the polar caps since 1926 and sporadically beyond.
△ Less
Submitted 7 June, 2007;
originally announced June 2007.
