Backward Sunspot Heralds Next Solar Cycle

GoramFrackinWacko writes "A backward sunspot chronicled on July 31st heralds the next solar cycle, and it looks to be a big one! From the article: 'Satellite operators and NASA mission planners are bracing for this next solar cycle because it is expected to be exceptionally stormy, perhaps the stormiest in decades. Sunspots and solar flares will return in abundance, producing bright auroras on Earth and dangerous proton storms in space.'"

Comments

wishing for news

[yagu]

This story reminds me of the recent "predictions" of a potentially devastating hurricane season with greater than average frequency hurricanes and more of these hurricanes being Category 5 (the strongest hurricane defined). On what basis?

On the buzz around global warming and its effect on hurricanes among other things, and the recent "example" season of a record-breaking number of hurricanes. So, naturally the prediction for this season was "lots of big hurricanes". I'm not sure, but so far I don't recall any hurricanes well into the season, but if you watch the Weather Channel, they're almost praying for some... The recent "tracking" of Chris showed almost despondent correspondents (pretending to show relief at Chris' dissipation) when Chris fizzled.

Similarly with sun spots, sun cycles and predictable sun cycle behaviors. We know more than ever about the sun, but the more we know the less we know how to predict what it's going to do. This is an interesting story in that stories about the sun and sun spots are inherently interesting (in my opinion). But, from the article: Satellite operators and NASA mission planners are bracing for this next solar cycle because it is expected to be exceptionally stormy, perhaps the stormiest in decades.... That is purely conjecture -- no more likely to be correct than not. Especially when considering the builtin caveat from the article:

First, the sunspot lasted only three hours. Typically, sunspots last days, weeks or even months. Three hours is fleeting in the extreme. "It came and went so fast, it was not given an official sunspot number," says Hathaway. The astronomers who number sunspots didn't think it worthy!

Second, the latitude of the spot is suspicious. New-cycle sunspots almost always pop up at mid-latitudes, around 30o N or 30o S. The backward sunspot popped up at 13o S. "That's strange."

Makes for good news though -- something scary to be afraid of.

Re:wishing for news

[thatguywhoiam]

This story reminds me of the recent "predictions" of a potentially devastating hurricane season with greater than average frequency hurricanes and more of these hurricanes being Category 5 (the strongest hurricane defined). On what basis?

Science. NOAA's instruments. Historical patterns. New data. In other words, our most educated guess.

Sure they're wrong sometimes, but the fact that the science is imperfect does not warrant discounting these observations altogether.

Re:wishing for news

[timster]

Inside the article there is a link to an article about why they are planning for a more intense solar cycle. It's not "purely conjecture".

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10mar_stor mwarning.htm

Re:wishing for news

[Red Flayer]

... but if you watch the Weather Channel, they're almost praying for some... The recent "tracking" of Chris showed almost despondent correspondents (pretending to show relief at Chris' dissipation) when Chris fizzled.

Hurricanes are exciting, especially to people who study them. Weather correspondents make a living based on phenomena like hurricanes -- so why wouldn't they be disappointed?

Also, dire predictions boost ratings and sell airtime. This is why the chance of snowfall is always hyped in the winter, etc.

Sure, thanks for pointing out that some people in all fields have a predilection for sensationalism -- but anyone who doesn't take all such predictions with a grain of salt needs some critical thinking skills.

I'm not sure, but so far I don't recall any hurricanes well into the season

Just as anecdotal evidence is not proof of something, anecdotal evidence is also not proof that something is false. We have an imperfect understanding of weather, and while all the conditions indicate that something is likely, it does not mean that something will happen. Also, note that the hurricane estimates for this season were revised downward based upon new, more current, readings in early August.

One more thing to note -- hurricane season isn't in full-swing until mid-August (now). A light June/July may be insignificant compared to what happens during peak season, Aug-Oct. Related to that, maybe a lack of early hurricanes bodes poorly for the rest of the season -- there is a lot of energy yet to be dissipated.

Re:Waiting

[Jon Luckey]

*cough*

Beat you by five minutes =)

Yeah, because it took me more than 5 to RTFM and read the posted comments then post myself.

After posting I get a new refresh of the article. Crap, a couple other people make comments along the same lines, and slashdot doesn't let you cancel a comment.

So I get a redundent mod.

Wish the durn moderators would take the Nyquist Sampling Theorem into account befor modding.

And I bet this comment if more than 5 minutes after you coughed too. :)