Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Roger Smith's developing LRF model


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Retrograde signals

All of the signals we have been discussing so far in this thread are progressive, in theory -- and they are presumed to be moving eastward at a pace determined by the synodic period of the field system's primary. For Jupiter, that would equate to 399 days on average, so that a J-field feature would be expected to drift east at a pace of (360/399) 0.9 deg longitude per day, or in the system being developed, one timing sector every 44.4 days. This might change slightly depending on the motion in space of the field sectors. If they happened to be flexing forward, the eastward motion would slow down. If they were flexing back against their direction of motion, then the reflection in the atmosphere (from the magnetosphere) would accelerate slightly.

On that basis, one can see that Mars field sectors might be expected to drift very slowly indeed, since it takes them 766 to 811 days to move around the hemisphere. That equates on average to just 0.4 deg a day or 12 deg a month. If the earth were encountering an accelerating Mars field sector, that reflection might be moving as slowly as 10 deg a month.

Just in passing, and before leaving the "progressive" field set for the time being, I wanted to emphasize that the research has uncovered multiple additional signals that are apparently created in the asteroid belt by larger asteroids capturing parts of the J-field and dragging those captured portions along at their own faster pace. I will present the evidence for that when we are finished with the retrograde signals.

One other point that fits into this brief interlude here, if the planetary field sectors are progressive, then the lunar interference waves should also be progressive, and the evidence for that is actually quite strong. If there were waves moving downstream at the Moon's synodic period of 29.53 days or the sidereal period of 27.32 days, those should be making eastward progress of about 13 deg per day or 3-4 deg every six hours. You'll see on any day's weather map plenty of evidence of such motion, and then some variation could be expected due to changes in the Moon's orbital speed. But sometimes lows don't move east, they move almost due north (NNE is a common track) or even NW, and in fact could be moving in any direction at various times. That, I believe, may be connected to second-order field rotations and not entirely due to lunar interference patterns. At some point after the retrograde and asteroid J-field capture sections, I will show you some evidence of second-order rotation in J-fields and S-fields. There is nothing to create that rotation in Mars-fields or the retrograde blocks we will be discussing.

So, now on to the retrograde signals. This is a very important part of the theory and in fact turns it into something much more capable of predicting real weather patterns than most of the existing "external signal" models that have been presented. The retrograde signals have improved my LRF performance considerably since about 2000, and they are large components of the model.

Venus -- retrograde blocking on a rather slow time scale

In the developing theory, retrograde blocking is ascribed to the field sector motion of objects faster than the earth. That can only include the two inner planets, Venus and Mercury, and in theory any asteroids or comets that have orbits moving closer to the Sun at some point than earth's orbital distance of 1 A.U.

First then, we will examine the evidence for Venus blocking signals. I began to notice a correlation between retrograde or blocking weather patterns and conjunctions of the inner planets around the mid 1990s and began to get more interested in European weather because of the high frequency of such patterns in Europe. It soon became obvious that the signals showed up first in Europe then near timing line one in North America, the opposite of what I was seeing with progressive signals. This made sense from the geometry of the systems.

It also became clear that the blocking patterns were not necessarily warm signals but that the thermal regime in the signal was dependent on the track that the ridge associated with blocking had taken.

The evidence to be shown here is actually quite surprising. Both Venus and Mercury provide very large signals and their segments have considerably larger amplitude than the overall signals. This is due to the large inclinations of their orbits around the Sun, making the details of their retrograde signatures in our atmosphere much different from case to case (by segments of orbit, that is).

We'll discuss the two inner planets separately, but this diagram of the orbital parameters of Venus includes for illustration the orbits of Earth and Mercury. Venus orbits the Sun at a distance of 0.72 A.U. and requires 225 days for that orbit.

The concept of "EOD" was explained earlier and applies to outer planet (or asteroid) positions. If we allowed the vectors to extend both outward and inward to the Sun, then the inner planets could be said to move through the EOD year in their orbital cycles. On that basis, Venus has an ascending node around EOD 8 December and a descending node around 6 June. Those are the times where a transit of Venus becomes visible. Otherwise, the inclination of 3.4 deg to our orbital plane forces Venus well above or below the Sun when it passes the Earth. That event is not called "opposition" but rather inferior conjunction (or I.C.), whereas the passage of Venus behind the Sun is known as superior conjunction. The period between inferior conjunctions is about 1.6 years, or 583.9 days to be more precise. Every eight years, Venus has a set of five inferior conjunctions and the dates in succeeding eight year intervals are about 2.2 days earlier each time. The diagram shows the 1772 position for an inferior conjunction in mid-August of that year, and the 2012 transit event (i.c.) on 6 June. Dates in years between 1772 and 2012 (every 8th year) lie in a regular series along the portion of the orbit between the two years (moving back through EOD July).

Readers may be aware that Captain Cook sailed to the South Pacific to witness the 1769 June transit of Venus, and this establishes that in addition to the almost-exact eight year cycle, there is a more exact 243 year cycle. This makes the analogue set for any given year something like this -- go back in 8-year steps to about the halfway point of 120 years, then another three years when the date will move forward about 1/5 of a year (72 days) and then a series every eight years moving further back will arrive at year -243 (in the 2012 example, the sequence is 2012, 2004, 1996 ... 1892, 1884, 1881, 1873, 1865 ... 1785, 1777, 1769.

It can be seen, then, that we are currently in an epoch with similar Venus conjunction dates to the start of the daily data and that in 2015 we will reach a reset of the data in that regard.

Meanwhile, the superior conjunctions are also 583.9 days apart, and each one occurs about 9.7 months after an inferior conjunction. The next superior conjunction is due on 27 March 2013, and you can see the current position of Venus and its future position at that time.

By the way, the grey line across the orbital diagram refers to today's date and shows EOD 5 Feb and 7 Aug. Venus, meanwhile, is like Neptune in an almost circular orbit. The eccentricity is a mere .006 and the perihelion takes place in EOD December. Earth would be closest to Venus at late December and early January inferior conjunctions, despite that date for Venus perihelion, because our own perihelion in early January is considerably closer to the Sun than any difference made by the slight eccentricity of the Venus orbital path.

Venus is inclined at 3.4 deg to earth's orbital plane and reaches the high point in EOD March, very similar to Jupiter. The low point is reached in EOD September.

post-4238-0-47852400-1360036456_thumb.jp

In the next post, I will show some graphs of temperature signals in the V-year period of 584 days. The signals are fairly strong, but the segments are quite a bit stronger and each one is different because of the combination of seasonality and inclination. In theory, a retrograde block moving west around the hemisphere in 584 days would move only 0.62 deg per day, or 19 deg a month. It would therefore take about four months to move from the CET temperature region to the Toronto region and there should be a lag time of four months so that the signal (whatever that was shown to be in the Toronto data) would occur four months earlier in the U.K. data. However, the motion appears to be somewhat influenced by sinusoidal factors and the actual lag is closer to six months. This implies that the retrograde motion may be slowing down towards timing line two because observations made in my research in the past few years have established that the motion is close to the expected 20 deg a month in the vicinity of timing line three.

It is also theorized that two sets of Venus blocks make the retrograde circuit, one reflecting the V-fields presumably extant between Venus and the Sun and projected outward to cross earth orbit around inferior conjunction, and then, a reflexive set associated with superior conjunction (as sketched out in the diagram). The fields may have the four-sector formation of outer planetary sets, but they are close enough together to function as two large blocks that show up well in the temperature signals. That's what we will discuss in the next post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

(note: slight error in diagram and discussion above, March s.c. date is 28 March in U.T. and not 27 March).

The 584-day temperature signals in Toronto and CET data

Now, it must be understood that the signals for Venus are blends of various rather different cases and so these overall signals are not as useful in making a long-range forecast as the segment that concentrates on the most similar 10-20 per cent of the data. But even at this rather coarse level, a strong signal of Venus blocking can be seen in the data.

Just for the record, I have come to visualize the V-block as a large, low-energy ridge structure that is drifting west with either a north or south component of motion depending on changes in inclination. The signature on a weather map of a V-block is likely to have similar heights to a J-field or Ma-field complex but usually less robust thickness advection. This makes a retrograde V-block a candidate for cold spells in winter and definitely hot, dry spells in summer on both continents but in particular in Europe since winter cases there can have the right trajectory to bring Siberian air west, whereas in the current astronomical epoch, the trajectory of winter events towards timing line one in North America is more likely to be from a southeast direction which at worst will factor as a near normal spell trending to mild.

It's the seasonal differences in these similar looking atmospheric patterns that would render the overall signals less robust than the segments. But let's get started with a look at those overall signals.

First of all, I had data sets worked out and extensively studied for my 2012 winter forecast and so I have a somewhat different time definition for the graphs. We don't start the CET data at 1-1-1772, but 1772 had a Venus i.c. event about 70 days later than 2012, so I began the set at day 72 of 1772 and worked down in 2.2 day increments to produce a composite 2920-day long cycle that would then reduce to five segments of 584 days (with some days skipped to keep the period accurate at 583.9 days). Those left out days in early 1772 are put into the data where they fit near the end of the 2920 days. So this places the inferior conjunction at day 158 in the data, and the superior conjunction at day 450. The data are placed in the 40-point filter for comparison with other signals, and this is accomplished by sets of (15,14,15,14,15,15,14,15) days repeated four times and ended with 15,14,15,14.

So the data in these graphs are essentially 14.5-day time intervals and any two data bars can be equated to one lunation or just about one calendar month (a leap year February anyway). These are longer periods than we used for Jupiter, and a bit shorter than we used for Mars. The signals are about as strong as both of those, with amplitudes of about 0.6 C deg either side of normal over the 584-day period for Toronto, and 0.3 C deg for the CET. Those are about the same in relation to variance of the data sets. Daily values within these smoothed data sets peak at amplitudes of 1.5 C and 1.0 C respectively.

The Toronto data were then adjusted from the data sets already worked out based on a 15 May 1841 i.c., which means that they almost match the dates chosen for the CET analysis, and need to be shifted just 2.3 intervals to the right from the original data. I managed to recalculate the relevant data sets on that basis so that they match totally for these 40-interval graphs. Since the theory was first based on the Toronto data, I will start with those and then comment on the CET signals.

The Toronto Venus signal is quite clear. A strong warming takes place about 2-3 months ahead of inferior conjunction, continues for a while after that event, and then fades to an equal cooling about where Venus would be at its brightest as a morning star (western elongation), four to six months after inferior conjunction. Another similar cycle then begins with a strong warming before, during and after superior conjunction. A second cooler period (at the start of the graph's period) occurs where Venus is at the evening star position (eastern elongation). You could see some evidence of a four-field-sector pattern and I continue to research this, but the general concept is that broad ridges and troughs are involved in the V-field pattern and these organize the temperature data into four roughly equal warm and cold sets of two each.

TOP GRAPH: Toronto (1841-2011) Venus-synodic-year 583.9d temperature signals in 40 intervals average 14.5d

post-4238-0-78356700-1360062663_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-05082400-1360062620_thumb.jp

BOTTOM GRAPH: CET (1772-2011) Venus-synodic year 583.9d temperature signals in 40 intervals average 14.5d

The CET data show a similar variation that at first glance favours simultaneous warming. However, I believe that the actual correspondence is offset almost half a full cycle. For example, the warming at the end of the CET signal (right margin of graph) is the warming that shows up in the Toronto data at inferior conjunction about five to six months later. The warming just around i.c. in the CET data shows up before s.c. in the Toronto data, but with another somewhat longer lag possible in the other direction, that raises the question, is the lag a sign of prograde or retrograde motion? The observation over many years strongly favours a retrograde solution, although there may be a component visible on Hovmuller diagrams of an east-west oscillation component associated with superior conjunction. So in other words, the global patterns may be more complicated than just a straightforward retrograde procession of these features. Of course, it goes without saying that as about a 15-20 per cent player in the overall complex model, these V-fields sometimes take some detailed investigation to spot on any given day. They may be crossing prograde features of equal strength, which is perhaps why on occasion these features swell up to unusual intensify and then subside again. This overlap effect was stated in advance as a reason for the prediction of severe heat waves in central North America in summer 2012.

The next step will be to investigate five sectors of V-field analysis to see the sharper profiles available from similar cases. Even 20% of all data would include considerably different circumstances of inclination at different times, but if we want a more detailed segment analysis, we get into historical periods that might have "climate change" differences, since ranges of conjunction dates are in a rather narrow spectrum during any given century. If there were three generations of about 80 years apiece, each of those generations would experience a different set of Venus conjunction dates that spanned five parts of the earth year about 25 days wide.

I am spending some time later today drawing up some of these segment graphs, having viewed them on my home computers (yes I do use 'em). There are 14.5-day intervals in some segments that exceed 2.0 C deg which is quite a strong signal compared to most we have seen so far, so we will be reverting to that "other" standard graph for the 2.0 C variations. The graphs above are standard 1.0 C variation like those used in most of the discussion so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Venus temperature signal data -- 5 segments

Recall then from the previous section, Venus overtakes the Earth every 8 years about 2.2 days earlier than the previous case. To get working segments of use in our long-range forecasting, where the more similar seasonal and inclination-based data can be directly compared, the data can be broken into five equal segments with the current years in the centre of each segment.

As we discussed, there is a 243-year cycle of conjunction dates. The best fit available for a segment in the daily CET data (and this was then utilized for the Toronto data) would be to go back 8 years from the most recent cases, as far back as 120 years, then skip to the next descending group of years another three years back in time, from there taking every eight years until the first available data are reached. The diagram helps to illustrate this and shows the relative positions of five segments of data. Remember, these segments are 584 days long (about 1.7 years) and will include the inferior conjunction years shown and a later superior conjunction about 9.7 months later.

post-4238-0-60286300-1360111510_thumb.jp

The first segment (A) was designed to start with 1-1-2012 and reach the i.c. event of 6-6-2012 at day 158 of data, but the range of "best fit" inferior conjunctions is then as follows (I will list the whole set this time, then shorten it with the usual sequence shorthand for other segments).

2012,2004,1996,1988,1980,1972,1964,1956,1948,1940,1932,1924,1916,1908,1900,1892,1884,

at which point the segment reaches an inferior conjunction date of 12 July, then on to 1881 with an inferior conjunction date of 3 May, followed by

(1881) 1873,1865,1857,1849,1841,1833,1825,1817,1809,1801,1793,1785,1777 (1769, 1761 with their transits similar to 2006 would be next but have no daily data) ...

and by 1777 that takes the segment back to almost its starting point with a 1st of June inferior conjunction.

Note then, that segment "A" will include all years with inferior conjunctions in the range 3 May to 12 July which is one-fifth of an earth year. The data in this segment generally cover all of the i.c. calendar year (or most of it for the years between 2004 and 1884) and about 7.5 months of the following year..

Segment "B" most recently observed with the 14 Jan 2006 i.c. spans a range of i.c. dates from 6 December to mid-February. The set between 6 December 1882 counting back to 7 January 1779 may appear incorrect at first glance but the year number changes when i.c. passes 1 Jan (in 1795, after 31 Dec 1802). Then from 2006 to 1886 the segment covers i.c. dates to 18 Feb. The data in segment B generally begin mid-way through the year before the i.c. date (same year for the December cases) and then the data run through the entire year of the i.c. (or next year for the Dec cases) into the January of the following year. Example, the data would run from Aug 2005 to Feb 2007 in the most recent case.

Segment "C" most recently observed with the 18 Aug 2007 i.c. spans the range 14 July to 21 Sep. This one tends to start in the Feb-Mar of the year with an i.c. and then ends late in the following year.

Segment "D" most recently observed with the 27 March 2009 i.c. spans the range from 16 Feb to the first of May and runs from about the November of the previous year (to the i.c. date) through the entire year of the i.c. and into the early to mid summer of the next year.

Segment "E" was observed with the 29 Oct 2010 i.c., and spans the range from 24 Sep to 4 Dec dates for i.c. -- this segment begins around early summer of the i.c. year and then runs through to the end of the following year (in the most recent case, ending 31 Dec 2011).

We can then begin to examine the segment data, as compared with the overall Venus-synodic-year data already presented. To do this for Toronto data, we need to use the 2.0-C graph scale, and to achieve that I have changed the original Toronto graph to half-scale for the overall data (green and orange colour code), superimposing the segment A data in darker colours.

post-4238-0-61569300-1360122964_thumb.jp

Note then, the Toronto data begin with a very cold signal followed by a warmer signal than the overall data just before the June i.c. -- this shows the second-order signal of the Venus sidereal year as Venus moves through its higher celestial latitudes in March-April (sometimes into May) of these years and that probably brings the block across the Atlantic faster since the timing lines are closer to Toronto as they reach higher latitudes in the grid. Instead of being near Bermuda or the Azores, the block is closer to Quebec and Labrador, directing the jet stream north across the Great Lakes region. This warming is then compensated with relatively cool intervals after the i.c. event but the overall profile cold spell is delayed several months (the data bars are roughly half-months). That is because the latitude after i.c. has dropped to a minimum taking the warm signal southwest rather than west or northwest at first -- it is only around October-November that the Venus block reaches higher latitudes and by then it would be around Alaska to eastern Siberia. There is a strong cooling evident here that took place in the recent case in November 2012.

At this point, the s.c. block is at low latitudes (due to projection issues) near the Mediterranean. That block will make WNW and NW progress during the winters analogous to 2012-2013 and should be at high latitudes at the late March superior conjunction. The temperature signal for segment A through the winter season before the s.c. event is rather variable compared to the overall signal and by the period of s.c. ends up being mainly warmer than the larger sample.

From that point on, the segment A signal is generally warmer than the overall data by 0.3-0.5 C and this is probably due to the tracking of the V(s.c.) block southwest during the spring and summer months, favourable for a warm Pacific flow to rebound into eastern North America. Of course this signal strength is not enough to dominate a season but it would be one component in a prediction for a warm summer in eastern North America in 2013. Later in the summer the signal switches to cooler than the larger sample of all data.

Now looking at the same segment in CET data, we find a generally cold half-year to start, in a period that would generally come during and after the retrogression of the V(i.c.) block at high latitudes, so this certainly makes sense in terms of a Greenland high being favoured. The cold interval matches up to the rather drab start to 2012 (most months other than early January and March were cold until August). The warmer signature in summer that was associated with the August warm spells of 2012 can be seen a couple of months after the June i.c. event. Warmth then dominates for about 4-5 months through the presumed passage of the V(s.c.) block and this warmth is generally slightly greater than the overall signal although not enormously different. There is a sharp change to cold at the point we are now at in this segment (highlighted by the black broken line below the 0.5 C line, and at this point I should note that the CET data don't vary outside the 1.0 deg limits so I used the original graph rather than doubling the scale. This makes the CET data appear twice as large as the Toronto data when you compare, but as Toronto variance is about twice CET, that normalizes the comparison.

post-4238-0-39738500-1360111704_thumb.jp

It would appear from this graph that some of the approaching cold spell is associated with the Venus retrograde, and I believe that the signature of that is buried in the chaos over the central Atlantic at present (the approaching signals from Russia are analyzed to be mainly Mercury retrograde as will be discussed later). The graph also makes it appear that a warmer foundation may be in store for the period March to July of 2013.

Tomorrow, I will describe segments B and C, then towards the weekend we will look at Venus segments D and E.

Edited by Roger J Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Venus segments B and C

It should be appreciated that this tour of the five segments is also a detailed look at a nearly-8-year cycle that has the peculiarity of starting 2.2 days earlier each 8 years, and as that tends to drift considerably over a century, requires an arbitrary re-set at some point in data sets this long. We make that arbitrary re-set near the half-way point of the CET daily data in the 1880s.That has the effect of making the 8-year interval more similar to the current era throughout.

We have discussed segment A (May to early July i.c. events) above, and now move on to segment B where the i.c. dates are in December, January and early February. This segment of course is an extension directly from the end of segment A data so if you want to know what the profiles look like just off the left margins, look at the end of segment A graphs above (previous post if nobody comments while I am typing this up).

And a reminder, the Toronto graphs are condensed scale (2.0 C deg amplitude) so if they look visually similar to the CET graphs, they are actually twice as variable on the visual scale presented, but that just equates to similar variance in relation to the different climatic ranges.

Now, for segment B, the Toronto temperatures for the 5-6 months leading up to the winter i.c. events are generally colder than the larger sample and somewhat colder than normal values. At that time, the V(i.c.) block would be at low latitudes near timing line three, making gradual WNW progress across the Atlantic, therefore not very effective at raising the jet stream although not in a position to cause major cold advection. This set of V-i.c. cases shows the most apparent case of a two-sector warming structure and it should be noted that early parts of this segment have cases of ascending node Venus transits. So the earth is generally passing through either the core or the southern hemisphere of a postulated V-block cylindrical structure in space (later cases towards February i.c. would perhaps be closer to missing this feature altogether to the south). More work can be done on this question within the segment. But the data show a mild month followed by a cold month before the inferior conjunction, then a longer mild spell that would equate to January to April (later cases February to May) as the V (i.c.) block crested just to the northwest of the Great Lakes and then drifted south again. This would be a pattern favouring a mild, dry response especially in spring months, having a height rise just to the west of Toronto places the Great Lakes in a dry northerly flow usually with little cold air advection. Looking at specific cases, we find some very warm periods such as mid-March 1990, early April 1974, late April 1942, early May 1934 aligned in the Venus segment data. There is enough variability in this data to suggest that the V block needs to be aligned with at least one other strong warming component to have a lot of influence.

post-4238-0-35325600-1360192306_thumb.jp

By the centre of this graph, the summers of these years appear relatively cool on average although some were hot and dry. This signal is attained when the distant V-(s.c.) block is likely split into two parts over Europe (the theory suggests that when a retrograde block is aligned with timing lines four to three, a high inclination results in a split). Hence there is a signal present for likely upstream divergence. This V-(s.c.) block then begins to appear by autumn of the years being discussed and following a rather low-latitude track due to its planetary orientation at high latitude on the opposite side of the solar system (these s.c. retrograde blocks are only understandable as equilibrium features in the complexity of the solar system magnetic field).

The reader can see that temperatures generally fail to reach the higher levels of most other segments in this particular case, and in fact stay below normal in intervals that average considerably above normal overall. So these would be expected to be cool to cold autumn seasons. There is one spike of much warmer than average temperatures about two months after the segment's s.c. cases, which would equate to the Jan-Feb of the following year's winter. This may again be evidence of a two-sector structure with this second sector having a more favourable orientation for warming. The warming is followed rather quickly by more colder than average weather and then rebounds to a rather warm spring pattern.

Now looking at the CET temperature signal for the same segment (.B.), these begin with a very warm autumn period as the V-(i.c.) block moves past to the south presumably (2-3 months before i.c. Venus reaches minimum inclination value in EOD September while Earth is in November). That mild signal does not really fade much through the following winter or even spring, possibly the feedback supplied by the long imprint in early winter of a mid-Atlantic blocking high without northward extension. One or two cases have overcome this tendency, for example the winter of 1981-82, but the Venus signal in these years is a mild one.

post-4238-0-81136000-1360193627_thumb.jp

A much colder (relative to normal) interval follows in the late spring but then it's back to slightly above normal temperatures in this segment as the V-(s.c.) block approaches and then passes (remember, we assume this is 4-6 months before event time due to the slow retrograde motion). This segment then produces a very warm signal for the following winter-spring during and after the superior conjunctions (most of which are in Oct-Nov). Recent cases include 2007, 1999, 1975 but it can be seen that a few colder months are possible in this mix. On the whole, this is the warmest part of the complex 8-year cycle in CET data. We will next be testing this signal in winter-early spring of 2015.

On now to segment C where the periods begin approximately March-April of years with a later August or September i.c. event. In the Toronto data (graph below) these springs tend to be quite warm and the summers continue a more subdued warm theme until the V-(i.c.) block arrives. During those warm spring seasons, the V-(i.c.) block would be generally at high latitudes, in the more recent August i.c. cases the highest inclination would be reached around May (with Venus in EOD March). In earlier cases it would be more like June or (before the time jog) April. In any case, some very warm Mays are included in this data set, such as 1911 and 1975, and a very warm April in 1844 when the signal shifts to its early phase so that is actually aligned. A hot June in 1919 seemed similar to these cases. So in the background, the Venus signal favours warmth through much of these years in the Toronto data. The point may have been made earlier, but Toronto correlates quite highly with most of eastern North America on temperature anomalies.

post-4238-0-02648100-1360194413_thumb.jp

Notice then, following the warm summer and the late summer i.c., there is a long slide downward in temperature anomaly in many of these years to give quite a cold signal for the winter following. The heart of this signal must have been reached around 1888, 1904,1912,1920 which followed September i.c. dates and provided very cold winters. Since 1928 the winter signal has relaxed to more of a near normal one on balance. Another warm spring follows in the second years of these segments, heading towards June-July superior conjunctions. The signal goes quite cold towards the end of these summers and into the following autumn seasons. This segment ends around November of the years in question, by which time a five-month cold interval relative to the background values of the Venus signal has elapsed.

Looking at the same segment (.C.) in the CET data, in the graph below, note that the temperature trend from this signal is quite warm through a long interval during and after the late summer i.c. events. This again must be feedback from earlier set-ups as the V-(i.c.) block would be passing around April of these years at increasing latitudes peaking around May in recent cases. This may leave an imprint of high latitude blocking which favours a warm summer but could interact with other signals as in 2007 to make the outcome wet. After a long warm interval that would last on average into November of these years, a colder winter signal arrives near mid-graph and during the time ascribed to V-(s.c.) block passage. This is only a slightly colder signal than average and is followed by another very warm interval in the data around the June-July s.c. dates. The autumns of these years are then generally quite cold compared to average as this segment ends with mostly below normal half-monthly intervals.

post-4238-0-00986100-1360195290_thumb.jp

We will look at segments D and E which roughly correspond to 2009-11 in the next section posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Venus segments D and E

Continuing now with the final two segments of the Venus temperature signals, and covering the analogues for the period late 2008 through end of 2011.

An aside, it appeared from studying all the segments that a signal was probably fairly prominent for the sidereal period of Venus (its own orbital year of 224.6 days) with the assumption being that it would vary with orbital inclination, peaking each time the planet passed highest latitude in EOD March. The curves derived for both CET and Toronto generally support that idea and I may show these after the segment discussion, but I am not sure if the signal is independent or whether it derives from the dynamics of the segment blocking evolutions. The CET signal would be based on a full set of orientations between Venus and the Earth while the Toronto data exclude about one-third of possible orientations (for example, all inferior conjunctions in five different 24-day intervals, those that happened 1772-1840).

Now, looking at segment D first for Toronto data, this segment refers to cases with spring (mostly March and April) i.c. events and begins around November of the previous years (most recent case starts mid-October of 2008 before an inferior conjunction on 27 March 2009.)

post-4238-0-46830800-1360354747_thumb.jp

At first, the trend is somewhat below the larger sample of all data, but from about three months before the i.c. to three months after it, a notable warm spell can be seen in the data. Examples include the record warmth of March-April 1921, 1945 and 1977. By the time we go as far back as the 1913 case, the record warmth extends more into early May due to the later Venus dates presumably.

About five months after this long spring warm spell comes another very warm month that would equate mostly to August in recent cases, September in early 20th century and late 19th century, and July in the data from 1846 to 1878 inclusive (every 8th year) -- 1854, 1881, 1921, 1937, 1953, 1961 had near-record months in that time frame. The connection to the Venus blocking cycle would have to be related mostly to the sidereal signal there (ascending node).

By the end of these segment-D years, the winter season would hold the s.c. dates, and these winters have a very mild signature for 2-3 months before the event but a cold month or so around the event, as can be seen from the two blue bars that are below the general trend curves. Otherwise, this entire period seems notably warm and this could relate to the fact that a Jan-Feb s.c. event would be riding a gradual height rise situation (reflection of descending node = ascending node dynamics).

Now, for the CET signal, the winter before the March-April set of i.c. events averages quite consistently 0.5 to 1.0 C below normal. One singularity that might relate to the retrograde of increasing latitude Venus i.c. block would be storminess -- Feb. 1, 1969 and 1953 are both about two months ahead of the I.C. vertical on the graph. Going further back where the data jog from April to February I.C. events (1889 to 1886) the winter of 1886 was quite stormy, and the very cold months of Jan 1838, 1830 and 1814 also sit about two months before the I.C. vertical. That indicates a singularity for Venus inferior conjunctions in the range of 5-12 March (which happen to involve maximum northerly latitude positions of Venus at the I.C.) ... a similar finding can be shown in the next topic, Mercury retrograde signals.

The CET signal turns a bit milder in the months around the I.C. (by then, the block would be moving southwest over north-central Canada). This is probably the work of the second-order sidereal signal. The general trend through the summer of the years involved in segment D is cooler than average. This seems to be more true of the second half of the segment with the later Venus dates (there were some hot summers in the July portion of the data before the jog to later dates in the 1880s). However, this trend reverses in late summer and early autumn to a notable peak as the V-(s.c.) block arrives around its ascending node. This makes sense as a southerly retrograde of this block in late summer (with Venus around EOD Dec-Jan) gaining latitude into the eastern Atlantic would imply a southeast flow from the continent.

post-4238-0-65049000-1360354772_thumb.jp

The early winter around the s.c. event becomes more normal in trend, then a long and sizeable cold spell begins (recent examples would be Jan-Feb 2010, 1986, 1962, earlier ones in 1799, 1815, 1823 and 1831. The data analysis suggests that these years will have a cold first half. We'll see in the next part of this post how segment E continues on with that trend.

Moving on to the final Venus segment (E), this group includes autumn i.c. dates and generally begins in the early summer of the years involved. Most recently, the segment began in July 2010 and the inferior conjunction date was 29 October 2010. These summers leading up to the i.c. event are generally warmer than average, while the winters that follow are generally colder, especially later into the winters. Good examples of very cold winters that follow the low-latitude autumn i.c. (that would make large latitude gains further west towards Alaska) include Feb 1995 and 1979 -- before 1955, the trend continues quite cold until this series reaches the December transits of Venus in 1890, 1882 (before winters 1891, 1883) before jogging to 1879, for late September and early October i.c. events, then we get back into the stronger cold winter signal (1855-56 in particular).

post-4238-0-27541800-1360356781_thumb.jp

The half-year before the August-September s.c. events of these years is a very warm one, as was the case in 2011 and 2003, certainly 1987, 1955, and 1931. This warm trend continues through the late summer s.c. blocking period and into the following autumns. October of 1947, 1963 and 1971 were among the warmest on record. The signal is more obvious in November somewhat earlier (but this aligns in Venus-synodic time) as in 1931. To follow the signal's further progress, scroll back to segment A, because the nearly-8-year cycle has now ended for Toronto in our discussion.

Meanwhile, the CET signal continues very cold for the second half of the years we were discussing last (2010 etc) and that finally reverses for about two months around the autumn i.c. event (in 2010 you may recall some very warm weather end of October and first half of November before the historic cold wave began). As with 2010, the temperature trend then goes sharply negative (the Venus blocking signal would be rapidly gaining latitude over western North America at this point).

post-4238-0-25005500-1360356887_thumb.jp

Besides Dec 2010, other months in this segment's cold winter spectrum include Jan 1995, 1987, 1979, 1963, 1955, Feb 1947, then this signal seems to weaken as i.c. dates into late November and early December are encountered. This must have something to do with the exact track taken by the blocks in these changing sets of dates relative to winter season and inclination etc. Beyond the jog in dates that switches the sequence to late September back towards October (winters such as 1884, 1876 etc) we find the signal weak until 1820, 1812, 1788. But in general the later 20th century set appear to be a singularity based on exact timing of the Venus blocks in that sub-segment (the most favoured dates for the previous i.c. being 29 Oct to 15 Nov).

This notable cold signal does not fade out entirely until the end of the summer in the average of all data, then the late summer s.c. shows a slight positive trend, followed by muted warmth that takes us through the autumn and in some cases early winters of the end of segment E leading back into segment A.

As a general note, these Venus segments show quite a robust set of signals that must be taken seriously as foundations for the long-range forecasts, although they would not be so strong that they dominated the forecasts. These Venus processes are slow retrograde episodes, now we will move on to the much faster Mercury signals that are also retrograde, and which have synodic periods of 116 days rather than the sedate 584-day Venus synodic period.

The introduction to this will follow in a day or two as I assemble the necessary graphs. You'll see some very interesting material in this next section. Mercury signals are sharply defined and they follow roughly the same logic as the Venus signals in terms of latitude shifts. After a general discussion of the overall Mercury signals, the data are arranged into seven segments. Unlike Venus, there is more of a year-to-year progression that is easier to follow conceptually.

Just to review one point, you could also look at the segments in the order that they occur relative to Venus time and not earth-year time. That would require looking at them in the order A,C,E,B,D.

Edited by Roger J Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Hoping to post the next section soon, but finding it a lot of work this time, so far I have most of the CET graphs finished but now have to match those up with Toronto graphs for a discussion, so perhaps by Wednesday there will be something new to read here. This will be part two of the retrograde index section, and looks quite interesting on the graphs. Fortunately the weather has become very dull so I should get this finished within a day or so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Mercury signals in temperature data

While Venus apparently produces rather slow-moving blocking signals that are retrograde, Mercury is moving slightly more than five times faster in terms of its synodic year (115.88 days) and so the Mercury signals, while following essentially the same logic, speed along at five times the pace of Venus blocking signals.

The orbital variables of Mercury include a greater eccentricity (.20) than for the other planets (now that Pluto is no longer considered to be a planet), and a greater inclination (7.0 deg) to our orbital plane. As shown in the diagram, Mercury reaches ascending node around EOD 7 Nov, greatest latitude in early to mid February in the EOD year, and descending node around 9 May. Transits of Mercury can occur roughly every seven years at those nodal dates although some cases are missed on either side.

Perihelion occurs in EOD December and aphelion in EOD June. This means that Mercury is moving fastest as it begins to rise in latitude after ascending node.

post-4238-0-03876500-1360705176_thumb.jp

The diagram shows that the first inferior conjunction of Mercury in the CET data was 24 Jan 1772, and a red tick in EOD October shows where Mercury was located at start of data 1-1-1772. In the Toronto data, the first i.c. was 21 March 1841. This is just about a half-synodic-year out of phase with the CET.

The next inferior conjunction will be on 4 March 2013. In general terms, there are three (and rarely four) inferior conjunctions almost four months apart, and three (rarely four) superior conjunctions between those. Because of the notably elliptical orbit of Mercury, the 116-day cycle does not just repeat without variations, but over the course of the year the i.c. dates fall back through spring and summer behind the expected dates, and the s.c. dates move forward ahead of the expected dates, in a cycle of about 8-12 days.

We now move on to look at the "gross" or all-data signals for the Mercury synodic year. The variations are relatively small on this scale, and even if we take each daily data point (as has been done for the two sets below), the amplitude is little more than 0.3 C deg for the CET, and 0.6 C deg for the Toronto data.

A note on how the data were fitted to the 40-interval graph -- three daily data points were placed in each interval, except two in intervals 9, 19, 29 and 39. Averages of these would not change the appearance of the graphs substantially as there tends to be rather slow movement of anomalies from day to day in the Mercury gross signals.

The CET data show peaks in temperature a few days before inferior conjunction, although on the whole not a very strong peak here, and another peak about 1-2 weeks before superior conjunction. The numbers on the graph refer to particular cases of warmth and cold in the three main annual segments (1 is mainly winter data, 2 mainly spring and early summer, 3 mainly late summer and autumn). The three main segments all look fairly similar and have slightly greater amplitudes than the gross signal, so in general it can be said that the 116-day synodic temperature signal is fairly "constant" in the background of data. Later, we will look at more detailed breakdowns of the CET data so that we can compare 22 segments each of which represents a narrow range of Mercury conjunction dates about 16-17 days wide. That will be in the next post.

post-4238-0-93894400-1360705263_thumb.jp

The Toronto data show more of a long cycle of relative warmth at superior conjunction and relative cold near inferior conjunction, in particular before and after that event, suggesting a much weaker peak of warming at inferior conjunction. In fact, the segments of data show that inferior conjunction has some cases that bring equivalent warmth to the notable s.c. peak, and other cases where the warming signal goes absent. This can be linked to orbital inclination as we will discuss in the next section. However, right here we have an important signal in the Toronto data, basically a four-monthly oscillation with period 115.88 days, so that every fourth month can be expected to be somewhat warmer than background. The warming lasts about one month. However, the details of the Toronto segments will show that this four-monthly cycle often becomes a two-month cycle because over half the segments have a stronger warming at inferior conjunction as well. The warming at superior conjunction is almost universal in the segments of data (at Toronto).

post-4238-0-01635800-1360705293_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

It would be possible to bury this section in a mass of detail, but I hope to keep the focus on the larger picture of how these gross trends vary in relation to the orbital cycle of Mercury.

Before we get into a more comprehensive discussion, the following graph shows the current segment of Mercury data, and includes years with conjunctions that are in the range of 9 days earlier to 9 days later than 2013. I have studied the results of wider or narrower segments, as well as time-variable segments that account for drift in the magnetic field. Within a few variables, these all tend to look similar, one gets into different results more by changing the range of dates by 15-30 days.

This segment is just about finished at this time, and refers to the previous i.c. event in Nov 2012 and the recent s.c. event in January 2013. Note that the segment has much larger amplitude than the gross signal and some of the daily data points extend beyond 1.0 C anomalies, but in general, the main features of the segment include a strong warming after inferior conjunction (about mid-late Nov) and two colder intervals about mid-Dec and mid-Jan which seem to fit the actual events of this past winter. The data towards the end of the segment reflect conditions recently and are generally low-amplitude. In general terms, I interpret any long stretches of small amplitude near-normal signals to show that the blocking is removed by longitude by at least 2 timing sectors. The Mercury block has been analyzed as moving west through Siberia and central Russia in the past two weeks. The next segment would be used to get an analogue for the next 116 days.

post-4238-0-13995300-1360706495_thumb.jp

Similar Mercury dates occur every 7 years or so, although a closer sequence is 13 years apart. Very close sequences of dates are found at 33 and 46 years. The data are studied in clusters that combine 7, 13, 20, 26, 33, 39 and 46 year intervals with this sequence repeating. A complex 13-year cycle is derived, and then this is recombined into a 7-year cycle of synodic years (115.88 days) with one stub of data left over, to give 22 segments covering the EOD year. This can be combined into a graph for the CET data as shown below, with colour coding to show above and below normal temperatures on a daily scale as well as larger anomalies. The light blue in this graph represents cases that are zero to 1.0 C below normal, dark blue shows daily data points lower than --1.0 C. Orange shows above normal to 1.0 C and red shows larger positive anomalies.

Green dashed lines track the actual dates of conjunctions and it can be seen how these vary through the earth EOD year. The data are arranged so that the first segment (top row of the graph) relates to the first inferior conjunction in the range 1 to 16 January. From then on, each row shows the next 16 to 17 day segment of conjunction dates. Time moves through the graph (from start of data in 1772) in the following sequence: 2, 9, 16, 1, 8, 15, 22, 7, 14, 21, 6, 13, 20, 5, 12, 19, 4, 11, 18, 3, 10, 17.

post-4238-0-47632700-1360707229_thumb.jp

Moving down the graph is basically moving through the EOD year for progressively later inferior conjunction dates. The superior conjunction dates would run from early March at the top of the graph to late February at the bottom.

One trend that is fairly obvious is that warming follows the sinusoidal path of the i.c. events and seems to be fairly predictable about 10-20 days before them. A rather strong warming occurs before late January inferior conjunctions. This may be related to some ideal track of the blocking signal at the precise range of inclinations at that point (late January i.c. events achieve a high latitude but 10 to 20 days previous, Mercury would be moving through ascending node and perihelion -- the signal would be a fast-moving northwest-moving blocking signal close to 45 deg north at timing line three). Each later case would move this blocking signal higher in latitude until about the mid-March set, then they would gradually return to similar latitudes but would be moving more westerly then south-westerly as the orbital dynamics change. One segment with late June and early July i.c. dates appears notably cold (segment 12) throughout.

Another fairly constant theme is strong warming about 20-30 days before superior conjunction. This is presumably the signal that warms Toronto data on a regular basis, appearing somewhat earlier in the CET data. If you follow a straight line down the middle of the graph (approximately halfway from inferior to superior conjunction) you'll see that this warming signal seems to shift a bit closer to the s.c. events in autumn to winter cases and also that the warming signal is not quite unbroken. There is what might be described as a "cold island" located about 10-20 days after superior conjunction when that occurs in late autumn.

The Toronto data have even larger variations from segment to segment, and might form the basis for a much more detailed study. Just to give a few highlights, segments 1-3 (Jan to early Feb i.c. cases) have a very strong cold signal about 10 days before those inferior conjunctions, with daily averages that include an extreme of -2.5 C deg in segment two. This suggests strong blocking over the eastern Canadian arctic in response to the approaching Mercury block which would be near Greenland by the logic of the system at that time. The strong cold signal disappears in segment 4 which is the case where any Mercury block might overshoot the north pole as inferior conjunction cases take place near maximum latitude of Mercury. The signal is seen to be building at about day 1 of segment four but it then fades out to a near normal trend unlike the three earlier segments. A colder signal returns in segment five.

April i.c. cases in Toronto data show strong warming about ten days ahead of the inferior conjunction, and in these cases, you would expect a Greenland blocking signal to be translating southwest across Quebec and the Great Lakes region (as latitude of Mercury drops rapidly). The warming in segment six reaches +2.2 C on day 13. This strong warming signal disappears by segment eight and for the rest of the cases of summer inferior conjunctions, the signal is generally a near-normal mix, which would suggest either the signal is weak or it goes too far south to be significant in this data set.

There are a few moderately warm i.c. signals in the autumn cases as well, so in general it can be said that the long four-month cycle at Toronto tends to become more of a short two-month oscillation about half the time in each 6-7 year period, depending on whether the inferior conjunctions hit acceptable time windows to promote the secondary warmings.

Meanwhile, the superior conjunction warmings are almost totally reliable features in the data from segment to segment. Cases with April-May s.c. events are particularly warm and produce months that average 1 to 1.5 C deg above normal. Data point 71 in segment three has a mean anomaly of +2.3 C, and to point 81 in segment three ( +2.1 C ) the interval is about 2 C above normal. Towards the late summer, the warming signal seems to shift a few days later especially relative to the earlier trend of s.c. dates but this could be ascribed to feedback of stronger insolation. About segment ten to twelve, we find some very large daily anomalies in the Toronto data such as +2.3 C in day 93 of segment ten. One or two of the segments with late November through January s.c. dates appears weaker with the regular warming signal, but it never really goes below +1.0 C for a half-monthly interval.

There is probably a lot more work to be done on tracking Mercury blocking signals and studying how these interact with other signals as they encounter them along the retrograde path. The polar overshoot feature is interesting because it would happen at some particular longitude every 88 days (the sidereal period of Mercury). To get anywhere with that would require a lot of study of polar data in all sectors, but if the blocking signal overshoots the earth's magnetic field for a few days every rotation, then this might be related to other phenomena such as sudden stratospheric warmings, and might even give us some clues as to details of those (such as where the cold signal might be expected to develop).

A graph of the Mercury sidereal year temperature signal is "in the works" but the data appear to be fairly flat with small peaks around the nodal points.

The question then might arise, what do we consider the "Mercury block" to be in weather terms? What are we looking for on a weather map? The answer to that in empirical terms appears to be relatively fast-moving retrograde high pressure that often takes on an elongated east-west appearance on the weather map. I've seen cases that I could combine into four types:

TYPE A Mercury retrograde -- occurs at low latitudes, only discernible from careful study of Hovmuller type analysis of data, but sometimes can be seen more casually as retrograde-type Bartlett pattern.

TYPE B Mercury retrograde -- occurs at medium latitudes, often quite apparent in 5-10 day time scale as high pressure retrograde near 50 N that turns a mild south to southwest flow into a near normal or perhaps cold northwest flow over short cycles. May lead to Greenland blocking.

TYPE C Mercury retrograde -- occurs at relatively high latitudes and can place high pressure over central to northern Scandinavia building a ridge west to Iceland or Greenland.

TYPE D Mercury retrograde -- occurs at very high latitudes and therefore allows progressive features to continue while placing a cap on how far north they can extend. Typical sign would be higher pressure around Svalbard or further north with slight retrograde motion (at that latitude, timing lines are more east-west than north-south).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

There are two areas that I have not ventured into yet, and that is partly because I recently upgraded my computer memory, transferred old files and found that the back-up had failed to incorporate a small amount of work done with this thread in mind about three weeks ago. That work was to standardize some of the files already done for comparison with the standard "synodic year" we got used to seeing earlier with the oppositions at a certain position on the graphs (bar 24 out of 40 to be precise).

Here's a brief overview of what could be presented in detail with these graphs. I promise to back this up with the evidence soon, but the overview is simple enough to describe.

There are two areas to be presented yet, one of which involves second-order variations within planetary field sectors already discussed. These second-order variations are apparently produced in interactive processes across the solar system within two sets of the field sectors (J-fields and S-fields associated with Jupiter and Saturn). The process is controversial as I found in a discussion about it on another forum. Some people who were willing to accept the concept or existence of rotating field sectors (in fact that is partially confirmed in other research having nothing to do with terrestrial climate) were not willing to accept that processes around Jupiter or Saturn (in their magnetospheres) could be transmitted inward somehow to the Sun or at least to our part of the solar system. I find it hard to accept or explain myself, to be honest, but the data point in this direction and I've grown used to seeing the evidence of it more or less day to day on satellite imagery.

Basically, I picture the process as being a laser-like super-focus of energy within the field sectors created at the magnetopause which may be acting like a lens for energy transference. I think it's plausible that larger satellites of Jupiter and Saturn would be creating powerful disturbances in those planetary magnetic fields (in fact for Jupiter this is more or less proven for Io and Ganymede, my research data indicate signals for Europa, Callisto and J-V as well as the daily rotation of the GRS). The concept has not been tested out so extensively with Saturn's moons, but here again, my research data indicate pulses of rotating energy associated with all the medium-sized moons and the one larger one, Titan. The J-field energy rotations are counter-clockwise or anticyclonic in our hemisphere, and the S-field energy rotations are cyclonic or clockwise.

An immediate application of this may be evident in "real time" as energy loop S-VI is overtaken near the top of the cyclonic loop pattern (in all four S-field sectors) by faster rotating S-V and S-IV energy, between 23 Feb 12z and 24 Feb 00z (Saturday afternoon and evening, in other words). This should be visible across western Europe as the current analysis shows that the S-3 field sector is over Europe. The S-2 field sector is over central North America and there should be a similar pattern developing over a region between Alberta and Wyoming at the same time. These energy loops are oval rather than circular (extended E-W and then rotated to be at right angles to the grid of timing lines). The logic of them is that the system is projected at about a 45 deg angle from source and this projection places the analogue of the planet itself at the centre of the system, and the loops are then arranged outward in the order of the participating satellites. Now as I say, without any evidence, this would seem like a Doctor-Who sort of a concept, but the evidence shows proof of the process (the amplitudes are in the range of 0.2 to 0.4 C deg, but bear in mind, the time samples include the 50-70 per cent of the time when the process is absent from the sector, so this equates to a larger signal occurring at intervals, which is also provable by breaking the data down into time segments).

These processes in fact seem to create a good deal of the weather variation within field sectors, but at the same time, other field sectors (notably Mars, Venus) have no significant rotational features and therefore produce less active or variable weather (assuming they are separated in space from the active J and S field entities).

Now, the second set of credibility-straining signals would be as mentioned earlier in the thread, the existence of multiple "displaced image" analogues of the J-field signals that are created by an interactive process in the asteroid belt. When I noticed at one point in my research that there was a faint signal for Pluto, essentially a Ceres-sized object located ten times further from the Sun, it occurred to me that Ceres and perhaps one or two other asteroids might display faint signals also, and just for curiosity, I crunched the numbers to compare the signals to either Mars or Jupiter (which as we've seen, over their 2:1 time scales, display similar sized temperature signals). Rather to my surprise, I found that Ceres and Vesta had large signals with profiles almost as large as Jupiter and arranged in similar logic, with field sectors near and after opposition, and on both sides of conjunction. I'll be posting the evidence for that soon. This naturally led to an investigation of other asteroids to see if it was confined to Ceres (the largest of them and recently reclassified as a dwarf planet, like Pluto) and Vesta (over half as large and with some advantage in distance from earth so that, especially given the 12th root / 15th root energy level dynamic, making Vesta a close comparison in potential.

The investigation showed that most asteroids with diameters of 100 km or greater (roughly a thousand in total) display faint signals, some of which are not so faint and place them in an intermediate group of roughly half-strength signal generation when compared to Ceres or Vesta. One or two actually matched them. Also, the much closer but smaller asteroid Eros which is sometimes as close as one-third the distance to Mars, showed a signal. That led me to investigate near-earth asteroids that are quite small (2-5 km) but which sometimes come very close to the earth and Moon in their orbits. Here again, there was evidence of flaring signals with long intervals of quiet (random noise in other words), associated with times in orbit when these smaller bodies came closer to the earth.

This was all placed into a graphical format to see whether the results strictly conformed to the very conservative dynamics of the (12th root / 15th root) function for mass and distance, and it seemed to indicate a stronger signal by factors of 5-10 even when that factor was applied. So it leaves us with the search for any plausible reason why these rather small (and in most cases distant) bodies should be "punching above their weight" even in a system where "weight" is already generously redefined to favour smaller objects (and greater distances). No concept of inherent process (process originating with the asteroids) made sense physically, but as Jupiter's signal seemed rather low compared to its graph position relative to Saturn or Mars, it occurred to me that the asteroids might be capturing some of the J-field energy (or material if that is the source of the energy) and then posing as mini-Jupiters in their own synodic years (most of which for the main asteroid belt are in the vicinity of 430-500 days, longer than Jupiter's but considerably shorter than Mars). It could also be the case then that Mars is also capturing some of Jupiter's field sector energy.

Whatever the reason or cause, the data are clear enough, there are signals associated with asteroids. Now this might seem to be a factor that would sink the ship by creating too many signals. As it turns out, the model seems to run about the same if we take the ten to fifteen strongest asteroid signals and assume that the rest will cancel out (as a thought experiment, assume there are one hundred signals of about 0.2 C amplitude and these are all randomly distributed around the earth year -- most of the time, these will tend to cancel each other out and therefore can be ignored as separate factors). I think that eventually all the hundred or more of these significant signals would need to be incorporated into a model just in case from time to time a large number of them happened to coincide. Perhaps this is the source of some of the remnant error in the model's performance over recent months.

Anyway, that should provide an overview of what we might be looking at soon in the thread, but I will start with the second-order variations before getting to the asteroid signals. I hope to produce a map showing the evidence for the specific case I just described for S-field rotation -- that by the way is one reason why I mentioned in the model discussion thread that I felt it likely that southeast England would see moderately heavy snowfalls around Friday-Saturday when the consensus from conventional guidance seemed to be a dry cold spell with flurries. I projected from the strong model consensus that the S-field position was just east of timing line three and therefore the rotational energy should peak at the triple-pass scenario over southeast England. I have used J-field rotational energy in past situations to diagnose details of severe weather outbreaks and have found that you can achieve greater accuracy in location and timing from application of this second-order variable to the conventional meteorology (none of which I disagree with, but these details are perhaps a bit of a leg up in terms of foreseeing details that sometimes are written off as "coming into focus nearer to the time.") Speaking of which, that would pretty well describe the appearance of this severe cold spell in February.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Second-order variation in field sector temperature data

J-field and S-field sectors appear to be rotating in sync with the satellite systems at Jupiter and Saturn. This process must be occurring through some sort of lens reinforcement at the magnetopause of these planets, with the signals then being transmitted (at light speed from this research) into the inner solar system. I have not had the time or resources to study the effects, if any, of these energy blasts in the solar environment but it would seem like a possible area for further study, whether mutual alignments can be seen to have any impact on solar variation, as the 19.86-year alignment cycle of Jupiter and Saturn apparently does.

Now, these statements would be meaningless without supporting data, and I have that both in the general sense and in the observational history over about twenty years. I will review the data for the J-field rotation first, then the S-field rotation. The two are different in orientation, as the J-fields rotate in an anti-cyclonic direction (counter-clockwise in n.h.) and the S-fields rotate in a cyclonic or clockwise direction.

The accompanying map shows a schematic diagram of how a J-field sector, when moving across timing sector 3 (note position of timing line 3) would be expected to display the rotating energy loops associated with the four larger satellites (which are known as Io, or J-I, Europa or J-II, Ganymede or J-III and Callisto or J-IV). Hatched lines around 55-60N parallel to timing line 3 give an idea of the average 10-day eastward progression of a J-field energy loop system (the rotating elements are moving faster but this is the drift of the entire system). A region west of Ireland has been noted in research for typical storm development when J-I overtakes either J-II or J-III in that region (it is labelled D.Z. for development zone). The CET temperature region is identified mainly for the benefit of any readers not familiar with the UK weather scene and of course this is the location of the data base for all the graphs identified as CET in this discussion

post-4238-0-12181800-1362014286_thumb.jp

The search for signals began (in the Toronto data) with a simple investigation of the temperature signal for the orbital cycles of these moons of Jupiter. A similar map of energy loops for a typical J-field over timing line one is included here (actual data from 15 July, 2012):

post-4238-0-58498800-1362021715_thumb.jp

It should be noted that J-field latitudes vary by season due to the different angle that the northern hemisphere presents to incoming signals from the rather narrow range of Jupiter's travels relative to our orbital path (the ecliptic plane). It can be summarized that the latitude variation is about 10 deg on either side of the mean and that it varies without lag by season (lowest latitudes in Dec, highest in June). This leads to variations in signal strength from season to season. It also gives some scope to use the analysis in assessing climate change cause and effect (for example, the 19th century J-IV signal at Toronto was stronger than the late 20th century signal, presumably because it did not move so far north in the colder climate associated with the lower latitudes of the geomagnetic field when the NMP was near 70 deg N in the mid-19th century).

However, it was realized by observing the actual evidence (in terms of weather systems) that the rotational periods (which are specified later in the discussion) of the energy components would be shortened by two full cycles every J-year from the perspective of a stationary observer (or a data base) because of the moving aspect of the system (the field sectors as explained earlier are moving prograde once around the hemisphere every 398.9 days, therefore the cycle of these orbital effects would move along with those sectors -- trial and error showed that the best fit of the moving cycle was to assume a half-cycle "extra" per field sector and with four of those, the total extra signal would be two cycles. In round numbers, the J-year of 400 days has about 24 J-IV rotations, so the observer would record 26 due to the four extra half-cycles. The reality is complicated by two factors. The four sectors are not exactly 100 days apart, different years have different flex and therefore different separations of field sectors, and signals from upstream field sectors can arrive in the data. This last detail leads to two sets of warmings about a half-cycle apart, when the data are aligned, and also there are signs of a slight "field focus" effect that slows the second-order variation near centre of field passage, so a more empirical modelling is suggested. Analogue cases of similar J-field sectors are the best guide to the actual outcome rather than any large-case-study profiles, but those do at least show us the general structure of this field sector rotation.

Significant temperature signals were derived for Ganymede and Callisto, both in terms of their simple rotational cycles (which are 7.166382d and 16.753552d respectively) and their sector-oriented cycles which reduce to 6.914d and 15.45d (in round numbers). Those are basically determined by dividing the J-year by the orbital period, then dividing the J-year by the frequency plus 2. The longer the cycle, the bigger the difference this will make in percentage terms. The orbital periods of Europa (J-II) -- 3.554094 days -- and Io (J-I) -- 1.769860 days are contracted only marginally by this moving frame of reference to 3.491d and 1.754d (decreases of about .06d and .015d.

It is worth noting that J-I, J-II and J-III have complex sets of mutual alignments over a period of about 437.1555 days but that the three of them never align as a triple (from any angle as seen from Jupiter), but sometimes two of them overtake Callisto at the same time. Ganymede overtakes Callisto four times every 50.2 days and these sets slowly move forward around the orbital loops in the direction shown in the diagram. Every 3.41 years one of these sets rotates to the mutual transit position. Only about four or five events are really close to being mutual transits (Callisto often misses the face of Jupiter anyway so the term transit would only be valid if the system were not at an angle to our line of sight).

Otherwise, a retrograde motion of alignments is true of all Jovian satellite pairs ( I - II - III) and these have a remarkable mathematical relationship. Although the number of orbital periods of III, II and I have a roughly 1:2:4 ratio (over any period, but the derived values are from the complex cycle period of 437.1555d) the more exact ratio is 61:123:247. J-IV is not in a tight numerical resonance with the others, on that scale, its ratio would be 26.0933. To achieve an integral approximation, all values would then need to be multiplied by 75 and that gives (starting with Callisto) the ratio of 1957 (synodic) orbits, 4575 for Ganymede, 9225 for Europa and 18525 for Io. That equates to a period of 32,786.66d or 89.765 years or to put it in context, today's (27 Feb 2013 12z) heliocentric orbital positions are similar to those on 25 May 1923 (03z). On my J-moons computer program, Callisto wanders out of exact alignment fairly quickly against the invariable rest of the quartet as it needs several hours more to hit that precise spot. Running the time increment 437.1555 days between then and now, you see a slight oscillation of the three members of the resonance that is a result of earth's different orientation to the Sun-Jupiter axis. A more timely and somewhat approximate return takes place just 11 full 437.1555-day cycles which is about 13 years and two months, with the last nearly similar configuration on 29 Dec 1999 at 19z. This also has the advantage of being very similar in orientation to the J-year although we are about 20 days further into the J-year at present, so any search for analogues in this 13 year 2 month cycle would need to account for the earlier J-fields being generally about 20 days behind where they are now in their position relative to timing lines, meaning about half a timing sector or 20 deg of longitude.

At this point I should add that timing sector three appears to be almost exactly between the J-3 and the J-2 field sectors so that most J-field rotation affecting the UK is near the edges of two of these moving systems of loops, perhaps by April we can look at some better case studies as the J-2 sector moves across timing sector 3. There is also the retrograde Mercury block interfering with the clear projection of the J-field between timing lines 4 and 2 at present. (the principle being, block in space equals block in weather systems).

For your interest, here's a program that you can use to find the orbital positions of the four major satellites of Jupiter.

http://skyandtelesco...ascript/Jupiter

Note that my map diagrams are basically a view from a perspective approximately 45 S lat of Jupiter in the sunward direction, at about 10 times the distance of the fourth outer satellite. We'll compare that to the perspective required to visualize the S-field loops. This position may give us a clue where the lens - laser - enhancement process required for this to become physical fact takes place -- at the magnetopause near 45 deg S, or at some other position, with a tilt of the image required in any case. I haven't really gotten much into studying how these field sectors rotate in our southern hemisphere but assume it is anti-cyclonic there also (in fact I have no data to confirm that there are even J-field warmings in the southern hemisphere or for that matter in eastern Asia although anecdotally I have followed a few cases to make sure this phenomenon stands a chance of being observable globally).

... note also that the typescript makes the name Io appear similar to the word "lo" and also the number ten, if I publish I will have to go with Times Roman for the better appearance of capital I. ...

The graphs below show the signals for the "adjusted" or sector-oriented temperature profiles for Callisto (15.45d, about 1.3d faster than the actual period) and Ganymede (6.918d, about 0.25d shorter) in the Toronto data over 172 years and the CET data over 240 years. A study is underway to determine whether there are more specific characteristics of these sector-adjusted signals that can be fed into the model for specific cases (for example, do these signals vary from the J-1 to J-2 to J-3 to J-4 sectors, and here it is appropriate to caution that some confusion may develop if the difference between the Roman numeral system for naming the satellites is not kept separate from my convention of naming field sectors with Arabic numerals). Just check this out, if we refer to J-III signal in the J-3 field sector, that means the Ganymede signal in the J-3 field sector which is generated at timing line one about when Jupiter is three months past conjunction and therefore arrives at timing sector three about when Jupiter is approaching opposition (three month lag). That's the sort of detail that has to be kept straight if any progress is possible in applying this research data. These are the shorter "moving" signals for these data sets, the stationary full-period signals are somewhat less focused and vary over about the same amplitudes, so in fact the "J-IV-2" signals are the best data indicators of this process.

post-4238-0-23055500-1362014251_thumb.jp

By comparison, here are the J-III-2 signals (in round numbers, there are 56 J-III rotations in the J-year and therefore 58 observed peaks -- the average is 6.914 days).

post-4238-0-76084200-1362030161_thumb.jp

The two signals for Callisto and Ganymede are about the same strength (0.1-0.2 C deg in Toronto data, 0.1 deg C in CET data) which seems rather small, however, a signal of 0.2 C deg from this source is totally unexpected in conventional physics or astronomy let alone meteorology, and in fact the signal is the average of weak and stronger cases during field-sector passage so at height of field warming the signals are a lot closer to 1 C deg (this is the observed strength during warm J-field episodes at Toronto). The actual signal (which is travelling along in the circulation) is probably about 3 to 5 C deg, but the trick is to analyze where it might be located at any forecast time, so what we are speaking about in reality is a 5-10 per cent chance that the 3 to 5 C deg core signal will be located over the Toronto or CET data sets and not, say, over Lake Superior or northwest Scotland. I have no doubt that more northerly stations might show larger J-IV signals.

Looking once again at the signals, note that they are faster than the orbital cycles, so that position of the "transit" or inferior conjunction is only significant as an indication of starting orientation. That takes us to the Jan 1772 data where the first transit (i.c.) of Callisto is 17 Jan and the first transit of Ganymede is 2 Jan. Heliocentric alignments would come 6 and 3h later respectively making the exact times 12z 17th for Callisto (meaning the data start just after a previous heliocentric transit about 18z 31 Dec 1771) and 00z 3rd for Ganymede. In the Toronto data, the first Callisto transit would be day 12 (at 20z) and the first Ganymede transit at day 4 at 19h (5:00z).

Peaks in the long-term data for the shorter "sector-oriented" signals occur 6d before Callisto transit and 2d after or 5d before Ganymede transit. The temperature data in 1772 and the J-field analysis in general show that earth was probably just entering the J-3 field sector at start of data, so this initial case (which determines the orientation for the entire data set if the numbers are carefully calculated for the signals) assumes that the J-IV and the J-III signals will be peaking off to the west of the UK (signal arrives later than transit) at start of data and then about 90-100 days later after field passage, to the east of the UK (signal arrives earlier than transits). If we assume field centre over the data set at day 58 (late Feb and March 1772 are warmer than average) then the J-IV sector-oriented signal would pick up 1.3d every 16.75d and move to about day 4 of the Callisto orbital cycle timed from transit (23% of orbital cycle), which means that maximum warmth is obtained around transit later in the field sector passage (given that the signal goes further north than the bulk of the rotation, this makes sense in meteorological terms). By comparison, the Ganymede signals are only advancing 0.2d every 7d 4h and this places the comparable peak at day 58 around day 0.5 relative to transit (7% of orbital cycle). Going back to the map, that explains the two locations indicated as "max warming" and the concept is extended to J-II and J-I on the map, although temperature signals for these have not yet been derived (from my experience with the Toronto data, I expect the signals to be fairly weak but a precip signal much stronger especially in the winter-half-year).

Comparing the Toronto J-IV(2) signal to the CET J-IV(2) signal is a complex business indeed. First of all, the CET data set place opposition at day 233, the Toronto set at day 155. It's roughly true to say that both data sets can be divided from start date into four sectors (but the order is a half-cycle displaced, the Toronto order is 3,2,1,4 and the CET order is 1,4,3,2). There is about a ten-day off-set between the data sets in that regard, and the data sets are themselves displaced an average of 8d "late" since we have to align the J-IV cycles using a formula something like this: (A1+B4+C7+D10+E13+F16+G3 etc) so the mean time displacement is half a cycle. Anyway, the comparison gets so complex that there is little point in trying to "compare" the two signals which are in any case expected to continue to push back against the J-IV timing by 1.3d per rotation. My attempt to compare them mathematically led me to the conclusion that they conform in general to the previous concept of a lag time of about 3 months.

Now that's a very basic overview of how the rotation works with emphasis on conditions at field sector passage. Conditions at either end of the 90-100 day cycle of field sector passage would be much different, obviously, with the warming focused on regions to west and east of timing sector 3.

I've noted in my research that mutual transits of J-III and J-IV about 50.2d apart in series, (which occur every 41 months, at other times, J-III passes J-IV at off-set positions of their orbits) lead to particularly strong high-latitude lows in the J-field sectors and these can be followed by powerful cold advection events, so a reliable signal for a cold spell is when a region is in a late stage of J-field passage (centered off to the east in other words) and it's 2-5 days after a mutual transit of J-III and J-IV. The next set of mutual J-III and J-IV transits will be encountered in autumn and early winter 2014-15, the previous set was centered on 21 April 2011 (08z).

Map inspection of all available cases of mutual J-III and J-IV transit events on the wetterzentrale map archives helped me to track J-fields and also to gain some idea of how much the grid has shifted north over 140 years since 1871. That appears to be 3-5 degrees of latitude. I am still working my way through the details of any east-west shift which would have to be established by comparing similar field timings.

In the next post around this weekend, I will show how large the signals are in more directly comparable cases -- these mean signals in all data are really just a faint indication of how strong these rotations actually are when we move in from the statistical averages (which bring together a wide variety of somewhat different cases). The amplitude of the signals increases into the 0.5 to 1.0 C range.

Here's a rule that may help you to remember how heliocentric transits vary from visual or geocentric transits -- "opp to con late shadows" -- if you can remember that, you know that the heliocentric transits will be after the geocentric transits from opposition to conjunction (with the maximum offset about half-way between) and therefore the reverse is true from conjunction to opposition.

Edited by Roger J Smith
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Apologies for interruption in posting

I must apologize for not continuing with the thread at the usual pace. As I was preparing to construct some graphs to illustrate the next proposed topic (S-field rotation) I realized that the periods were not backed up by computer programs as with the J-moons in the previous section here, and there were some fairly difficult calculations involved to assure accuracy all the way back to 1772. I have the orbital parameters available to required accuracy, and some fairly old almanacs to compare calculations to reality. There are even older almanacs available at some distance in a research library.

However, that wasn't the only practical problem faced. In trying to get this information assembled, we had two periods of very severe weather in Ireland where I do a lot of forecasting daily, so that was taking up the time I normally have to do this data manipulation. Also, I discovered that one key element in the S-field rotation had a less circular orbit than all the other elements in both that set and the J-field set, which gave me a whole new set of calculations to perform.

Anyway, that's all finished now and I hope to have some interesting graphs to show, to illustrate the S-field rotations. That should start in the next day or two.

For now, I will post this illustration of the motion of J-field warming taking an example already mentioned earlier in the thread, the J-2 field warming of winter 1966-67.

The graph, posted below, takes what is presumed to be the mid-point of J-2 field warming as it moves prograde across the grid between Dec 1966 (using data from Vancouver, BC in western Canada) to March 1967 (using CET data), and taking Toronto and St John's NL in eastern Canada as two intermediate points. The Toronto data are representative of timing line one and align the weather response to the earth's passage through the field sector (Jupiter opposition being at this point and the J-2 field sector being more or less straight-line).

post-4238-0-17591800-1364936258_thumb.jp

These graph segments illustrate daily temperature anomaly, in red/blue or similar colour codes, precip in light green from the base of each segment, and one or two indications of very strong winds in black icons near the top of daily bar sections. The four time segments are aligned with J-III rotation by going forward 36 days in each case. This only introduces a slight offset since the period of five cycles of J-III is 35 days 20 hours and each of these locations has a somewhat earlier climatological day relative to universal time, so that the net lag is about one to two hours. Also, 36 days approximates the expected prograde motion of the field sector assuming a 396-day period around the hemisphere. The longitude differences are each about 30-45 degrees, on average 40, or about one ninth of the total time, which would therefore be 44 days. The actual expected time differences from empirical study might be closer to 45, 30 and 50 days for the three intervals. The four sites selected are each fairly close to a timing line (9, 1, 2 and 3).

One other aspect of the graph to note is that J-IV transits almost line up given the 36-day time frame, as two J-IV cycles computes to about 33.5 days. These J-IV transits are shown by yellow hatching in the appropriate daily bars, and you'll note how these migrate forward in time, relative to the J-III sets. Meanwhile, the J-II peaks, about twice as frequent as the J-III, were occurring around days 2 (early) and 5 (late) in the seven-day time panels between J-III transits which are shown with the bold vertical lines through the entire set of graphs. Over about four months the J-II transits would move about one half-day left against the J-III time frame so the rhythm of J-II energy peaks remains about the same.

A study like this shows the potential for doing a very detailed study of field sector dynamics as each case is tracked downstream in real time or with historical data. There are several features to note in the four illustrations of the J-2 field sector. Anomalies are relative to station normals. The Vancouver data which essentially spans most of Dec 1966 shows a strong warming with heavy rainfall, all indicative of a confluent southwest flow, terminating with evidence of a more west to northwest flow as the field sector height anomaly moved off to the east (intermediate points have been studied to see what exactly happened to the warm core, it seemed to hold together across most of western Canada with a lag in average terms corresponding to the prograde motion, then the field appeared to reset between the Rockies and timing line one). In the Toronto data, the strong warming appears in mid to late January, with two daily record highs on 23rd and 25th, followed by a strong storm system on the advancing frontal boundary, a storm known further west as the Great Chicago Blizzard as it gave record snowfalls there. In southern Ontario it gave a mixture of heavy snow and freezing rain over a two-day period immediately after the record warmth, then a much colder regime ensued with the J-field sector apparently off the east coast. Data from the next point downstream, St John's indicate that the warming then peaked over timing line two about late February into early March. The storm track was evidently running across Newfoundland throughout and the J-III energy peaks seem to provide a focus for periodic strong storms, some of which produced wind gusts of about 120-160 km/hr in association with the temperature peaks shown.

By the time this field sector crossed the Atlantic in February and March, it gave a rather subdued performance relative to CET normals near timing line three. The data suggest that the field sector was fighting the influence of some much colder signals in cyclonic rotation and that may have weakened the intensity somewhat, although the period is generally above normal, but not as noticeably as earlier in the history of this field sector.

NOTES on the graphs -- Vancouver period Dec 1-30, 1966

Toronto period Jan 6 to Feb 4, 1967

St Johns period Feb 11 to Mar 12, 1967

CET period Mar 19 to Apr 17 1967

Mean temps approx 5 C for Vancouver, -4 C for Toronto, -2 C for St John's and 7 C for CET but daily normals are used in all cases.

Precip is scaled so that 25 mm is the mid-point or temperature normal horizontal in each segment, and 50 mm would cover the entire daily bar to top of the segment. As it turns out, only two cases took the precip code into the temperature field (winter precip is correlated with warmth) and when that happened it emerged on the warm side of that temperature graphic so that we have no cases of the precip codes being "lost" in the temperature graphics. The black bars for wind speed are scaled so that they run from 80 to 160 km/hr in the upper quarter of each segment. Most of these are in the third segment for St John's as the other sites did not experience very frequent strong winds in the periods selected.

Edited by Roger J Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Rotation of S-fields

 

After all sorts of problems with data sets and exact periods, I have managed to extract what I can from the CET data to compare with earlier work that I had done on the Toronto data. This is a brief report, and I will say up front that the situation with this research is incomplete, especially on the CET side of the work.

 

Back around 1990-92, I became aware of evidence for J-field rotation, as explained in the previous few sections. That rotation was observed to be anticyclonic. It naturally occurred to me to be vigilant for any evidence of S-field rotation. Around that same time and towards 1995, I did considerable work on constructing a theory of S-field rotation near timing line one, and found it to be cyclonic with a similar scale to the J-field rotations (when compared to size of systems at source).

 

The first map shows the theoretical positions of S-field energy loops when an S-field is located over timing line one. Bear in mind that every S-year (378.1 days) there are four such systems that continue to drift prograde (east) around the hemisphere. So if you imagine these loops to be slowly drifting along with upper level features, it would give some idea of the S-year background weather signals, on a time scale that would average four cycles of about 94.5 days.

 

post-4238-0-99728800-1366358631_thumb.jp

 

For the North American study, a lot of details could be related here, but I will keep those "under my hat" except to mention three very significant findings. First, a considerable fraction of the retrograde warmings in higher latitudes occur when S-field rotation reaches higher latitudes near the eclipse positions of S-VI and S-VII. The energy loop for S-VIII has also been identified and takes a very wide orbit around the same centre of rotation, and in fact would barely hit the map grid most of the way around. These energy loops seem to have considerable potential to assist in accurate modelling of subarctic and arctic weather trends "over the horizon" ... in relation to that finding, when an S-field sector is near timing line one, the east coast of Canada gets the most vigorous cyclogenesis possible especially when S-V overtakes S-VI which seems to provide a sharp energy pulse, and to a lesser extent whenever any other combination of S-III to S-VI overtake in that portion of the energy loops.

 

A third finding is that in summer, severe weather of the "pulse thunderstorm" variety occurs when inner S-field loops are in alignment near transit. S-II overtaking S-III appears to be the best case for this phenomenon (probably due to proximity to jet stream and timing issues). The approximate periods of these loops from inner to outer would be 0.95d, 1.37d, 1.89d, 2.73d, 4.16d, 15.96d and 21.32d.

 

The second map shows a theoretical schematic for S-field rotations near timing line three as observed in a recent case in February 2013. This map is followed by some specific examples of cloud and precip activity around 24 Feb when there was a cold northeast flow across most of western Europe. At that time, the centre of S-field rotation (by theory, it would be the S-3 sector) was over central Europe located near Geneva.

 The various colour-coded dots on energy loops show positions at 3-hourly intervals, at a time when most of the energy was moving west around the top of the loops, and overtaking the S-VI energy, but during this time, some interesting flares of activity along the S-VI loop ahead of its postulated position were noted, in sync with positions of inner components that had recently overtaken S-VI. This is all quite extraordinary but apparently the S-field sectors are projected in the opposite polarity to J-field sectors, which matches the fact(oid) that Jupiter's magnetic field polarity is opposite that of Saturn's.

 

post-4238-0-60825500-1366356158_thumb.jp  post-4238-0-19589800-1366356187_thumb.jp

 

 

Energy loops with the S-field are dominated by the S-VI (Titan) loop which has a synodic period of close to 15.9693 days, and a moving period of 14.725 days. As the motion is cyclonic, the signal for both Toronto and the CET zone would be expected to vary during field passage from a strong warming when the centre of rotation was west (by half a timing sector for best results) about 2-4 days after transit with the energy rotating northward at that time, a more variable and damped pattern during field passage, and a strong cooling after Titan (and other elements) passed the top of the loop corresponding to the eclipse position.

 

The data analysis has been painstaking to say the least, because of some uncertainty on the actual periods. While there are data programs easily accessible for very precise timing of J-moon events well back into the CET period, I have to convert almanac data for specific years, a different measurement of period (tropical) and then inspect the data in segments to see if any obvious time shift has been retained. The period used in the analysis is 15.9693 days. Titan transits are at day 14 on average, and with the shape of the loops, day 13 would then represent the base of the loop and day 5 would represent the northern extremity of the loop. Direction is counter-clockwise.

 

The Toronto data have generally continued to follow a similar cycle since start of data in 1841. For anyone wishing to construct a data set, day 1 of that data (1-1-1841) is a day 5 of the CET data, so to compare the two, this different starting point needs to be incorporated. Recent Titan transits were on 15 and 31 March, 16 April, 2013.

 

The Titan cycle of 15.9693 days generates a peak of about 0.3 to 0.4 C deg (as strong as anything in the J-field studies) located about 2-3 days after transit. This is seen to be caused by very large peaks at that point at favourable times of field passage, combined with almost random "white noise" output in the data at other points in time. That in turn yields a fairly reliable quarter-S-year pattern or S-field passage signal, which is constructed by dividing the modulated S-year (modulated by Titan dates) into four segments. In practice, this means a fairly constant flow of six cycles with the occasional five-cycle interruption to maintain pace with the S-year. Six cycles of Titan would be 95.8 days, compared with 94.5 for a quarter-S-year (the average duration of sector passage intervals). That would give you an approximate ratio of 47:1 for the six-cycle and five-cycle data sets, so basically for practical use the system would need to drop one cycle about once every 12-13 years.

 

The overall signal for 16 days (approx) in both the CET and the Toronto data is shown below, then the average 96-day or quarter-S-year signal for the CET data.  I have worked out similar graphs for the Toronto data (96-day) but find that they are more variable for the four sectors and would prefer to keep the findings confidential so as not to give non-paying freeloaders any advantages in their forecasting. There are some very large specific signals buried in the data but you have to be able to sift through these somewhat variable time frames to find them.

 

______________________________________________________________________________________

post-4238-0-48396800-1366356346_thumb.jp

 

(16-day Titan signal, CET in dark red and light blue bars, scale to right ... Toronto data with larger amplitude in lighter orange and dark blue, take scale at 2x shown, e.g., read 0.1 as 0.2). ... Day 14 of the CET data set and by adjustment of the Toronto data, Titan heliocentric transits, marked by green vertical shading. To visualize relationship to loops, transit is where loop crosses timing line (of field sector, see schematics) at about 35-40 N and eight days earlier on graphs, eclipse is where loops cross timing lines at higher latitudes around 55 N or higher. Note that the distortion of the magnetic field into a NNW-SSE orientation means that the southernmost latitude of the loop is probably one day earlier than transit, and the northernmost latitude is one day before eclipse, for Titan. Similar effects adjusted to time scales of other orbits can be expected.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

post-4238-0-23265300-1366356505_thumb.jp

 

96-day adjusted S-field sector signal, six cycles of Titan, four day interval from 1d before to 2d after transit, or lower right quadrant of cyclonic loop, highlighted with six vertical green bars ... four days of anomalies per vertical bar, scale to right ... the first instance shows a strong warming at transit, then this signal gradually fades out, presumably as field sectors move across timing line three and off to east, then another surge of warming appears in last case. ... This establishes an average timing of field sectors but individual cases may demonstrate a more variable result.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

 

Technical note: The 96-day cycle is worked out from the adjusted S-year profile which is constructed from set numbers of 367 and 383 day periods to average 378.1d and to keep the errors in both Titan periods and S-year periods minimized. As there are more 383 day intervals than 367 day intervals, the data set provides a 383-day 24-cycle Titan profile which then can be divided into four quarters. In reality, these 96 day profiles or more precisely 95.8 day profiles would drift ahead of actual S-field sectors in such a way that the signals would tend to drift laterally from these profiles by as much as one-half cycle (out of six). Thus in practice it would be better to use more precise analogues than this statistical profile (and I do).

 

That second data set would be the more useful one for long-range forecasting. But even more useful would be customized data sets of similar cases, normalized to Titan orbital dates (in plain English, taking similar S-years and adjusting the dates to forecast periods so that Titan orbital variables were timed correctly for the forecasts).

 

Other S-moon signals are quite weak and tend to flare to somewhat more significant values when in alignment with Titan. For now, I will keep those temperature signals out of the discussion (they tend to be on the order of 0.05 C deg amplitude peaks following similar logic to Titan) since the main utility of the other energy loops in forecasting would be an assessment of process (more useful in weather type, wind direction, or precip forecasting than temperature variability). There have been case studies in which the flare-ups of alignment energy in S-field energy loops has appeared quite significant, especially when S-V passes S-VI near and after transit (at the most energetic point in the cyclonic loop). Mutual alignments of several components in the system can create large pressure waves in the cyclonic flow patterns of central S-field sectors. This is also a subject area that could generate a lot of detailed study and development.

 

Now, for the CET data set and the associated timing line three weather patterns, the dynamics appear similar but the data showed a tendency to be very subtle for large portions of the period 1772 to 1930, then stronger S-field rotation signals appeared in the data. After some exhaustive analysis in the past month, I have convinced myself that the changes are not due to changes in period (errors in assumed periods), as the processes just aren't as strong at any shift within the known margins of error. Also, I noted that the data became particularly non-responsive to S-field rotation during lower solar episodes such as the Dalton minimum and 1875 to 1915. Now that does not automatically suggest a weaker process. It might indicate a more pervasive process because cyclonic rotation is going to present very complex temperature signals with cold air advected from northeast, milder air from southeast, issues with zonal flow, troughing, ridge development ahead of cyclonic flow, etc.

 

The CET signals are closer to 0.1 C in amplitude long term,  but  the amplitude has increased from very small to a value closer to 0.3 C in the recent half-century (note also the warming trend of that period would move the entire signal upward 0.5 C deg or thereabouts). This long-term increase in signal strength suggests that S-field rotation may be a process that is close to the margin of sustainability in the complex geomagnetic and solar system magnetic field environments that are in play. Another indication of this (indirectly) is that weaker field sectors of Uranus and Neptune which would also be expected to demonstrate rotation have almost zero signals of rotation in sync with their satellites. The value derived for Neptune's moon Triton (the largest of the satellites of these two planets) was close to random white noise at about 0.01 deg C. Also, for both U-field and N-field sectors, it has proven very difficult to find them in practice on weather charts, study them in real time, or see any rotational features. I can only theorize that they exist from the signals they leave in temperature data but within those signals there are virtually no signs of second-order rotation ... and if there were, we would encounter some formidable geometric problems with both cases, as orbits of these satellites are projected at constantly varying angles to our line of sight.

 

In passing I could also mention that Mars field sectors could show rotation but the satellites of Mars are very small and no rotational signals have been determined yet within the data, despite the rather large size of the Mars field sector components in the data.

 

S-field rotation could be, in fact, a very active component of this complex new system of weather analysis. But it may also be necessary to state a quasi-random element in play, where this just happens to be about at the thresh-hold of what we might call "receivable signals" where signal strength attains a minimum value. As such, it might be the component in the model most subject to a hit or miss characteristic. We would expect J-field rotation to be almost always evident and easy to locate and diagnose from a theoretical framework. We would expect S-field sectors to be almost equally easy to find and identify, but rotation within them might fade out and then gain strength, possibly in modulation by some factor such as presence or absence of competing signals.

 

With the 21-day difference in period of J-year and S-year, it becomes obvious that J-field and S-field sectors will not retain the same orientation to each other over a period of about 5 years. You can find cases where they overlap, partially overlap, and (to the extent possible given their width) separate into eight non-overlapping zones. We were in an overlap situation in late 2010 and are now in a partial overlap, expecting maximum separation in about a year from now. Overlap can create weather responses where you have a strong J-field signal fighting off weaker S-field rotational aspects that are running through the higher thickness fields and slack upper wind fields typical of J-field sectors (S-field sectors are typically large-scale troughs with lower thicknesses). Those are times where signals might become weak, but at the same time, J-field signals might also be impacted.

 

The partial overlap leads to odd transitions from one weather regime to another with very low predictability from conventional modelling techniques, which of course are not programmed to recognize any of these external energy sources.

 

I could mention one last finding of interest, the complex reinforcement signal from the resonant orbits of S-VI and S-VII. This cycle has a duration of approximately 63.65 days, and in relation to the energy loops, it retrogrades clockwise around the loops every 12.1 years. We are currently at a point where S-VI overtakes S-VII near the western extremity (known in astronomical terms as eastern elongation, the frame of reference being planetary not terrestrial). About nine years from now, as well as three years ago, this overtake was near the bottom of the energy loops, and about three years from now, it will be near the top of the loops. There are some complex cycles of temperature response to these, but I have not finished the work of separating out what is independent in those signals and what is forced by the addition of the more basic signals already discussed. It appears that there could be a weak 12.1 year temperature cycle introduced, but there is definitely a rather strong (0.5 C) amplitude temperature signal that shows up on the 63.65 day time scale and variations in that by orientation to the loop geometry. The next S-VI / S-VII overtake event is around 17 May. At that time I will post a map in diagram form showing the locations, and during the event there are fairly well timed S-V and S-IV overtake events, which should have the effect of creating a slow-moving north to south frontal band to the west of closed low pressure revealing the location of various S-field sectors at that point in time. As the current locations seem to be roughly timing lines 2 and 4, allowing for eastward drift, this could place the closed low feature fairly close to the Baltic by mid-May and therefore the north-south frontal band over Britain and Ireland, so this would be an application in theoretical terms which clearly would not be possible from any conventional means (as today's date is 18 April).

 

I may post one more time on S-field rotation then move on to a final topic in this thread, that I am calling "asteroid resonances of J-field signals" which will provide evidence from data of similar patterns to the J-year in synodic periods of asteroids.

Edited by Roger J Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

In the previous post, I mentioned a developing situation in the S-field rotation timed for 17-18 May. Here's the actual diagnosis of that cyclonic rotation system as evidenced from weather satellite, radar and pressure observations in Europe around 06z to 12z today (18 May), with the S-field rotation shown. Red dots conform to the locations of S-moons at 12z today and energy features are generally following this system although to make it work a distortion as shown in the diagram is required. This distortion would correspond to a similar distortion of the field in three dimensions in space. At the level of understanding that I currently have reached, I don't really have much of a lead on either understanding or predicting these variables, so a timing error would be expected if this theory were used for detailed long-range forecasting. The main result of the distortion is that the most powerful waves, S-VI currently overtaking S-VII, are delayed with respect to where a theoretical approach would have placed them, by about 1-2 days. The distortion keeps the geometry of the loops intact on the assumption that the entire system is drifting east along the dashed blue line, and that the centre line of the field in three dimensions would correspond to the approximately north-south curving "timing line." The earlier assumption that the system would be centered in the Baltic region was too fast with its progressive analysis, the drift east since March when the forecast was discussed has slowed by my analysis all through the period but in particular this month, probably reflecting a westward shift of timing number rather than the other system-logical postulate which would be acceleration forward in space of the S-2 field sector (thus reducing the angular projection into the geomagnetic field). But it could be a combination of the two effects.

 

.post-4238-0-30329200-1368875147_thumb.jp

 

 

Introduction to the "Last Frontier" of this theory -- asteroid signals

 

I have been working away on the details of various asteroid-related signals in the data, and finding that there could be as many as 50-100 significant signals of this type.

 

The basic concept is as follows. Various asteroids in orbit between Mars and Jupiter (it is postulated) interfere with the J-field and possibly other components such as S-fields, in such a way that essentially the asteroids act like smaller "Jupiters" in the overall system. This is not because they have the required mass or magnetic fields of their own, but because their orbits reflect some kind of natural resonance in Jupiter's (and possibly Saturn's) field structure. The effect may in fact not be caused by the asteroids themselves but by the resonant waves that seem to be statistically a passive cause of asteroid orbital distributions.

 

Without going into a lot of tedious detail, the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter tend to cluster into about five groups, at 2.3, 2.45, 2.6, 2.77 and 3.0 to 3.2 AU distances. A few other significant asteroids are located further out near 3.5 and 4.2 AU, and two fairly large outliers exist beyond Jupiter's orbit (Hidalgo and Chiron which is between Saturn and Uranus).

 

In addition to all of those asteroids, there are groups closer to the earth but they are generally much smaller in size.

 

Typical asteroid periods range from 3.6 years in the closer main belts, to 6 years in the more distant belts, but the largest, Ceres, has a period of 4.6 years. The synodic periods are generally about 400 to 600 days, so basically intermediate between Mars (810d) and Jupiter (399d).

 

My research has detected signals that are almost comparable to J-field signals for about a dozen of the main asteroids including but not limited to Ceres, Vesta, Juno, Flora, Victoria, Davida. Hebe, Hygiea, all of which are among the larger asteroids. Research into more intermediate sized asteroids shows that this signal set begins to extinguish at the 50-100 km size but there are variations among candidates of similar size, orbit and other variables such as albedo. As already stated, these phenomena may happen to be naturally occurring resonances in J-field structure that would occur whether the asteroids were moving through the system or not. And it should be stressed, the asteroids are moving relative to J-field sectors. Ceres overtakes Jupiter every 7.65 years on average, Vesta moving somewhat faster takes about 5 years. This means that the more significant asteroids move through J-field sectors (the four main ones) about once every year to eighteen months.

 

Signal intensities are generally on the order of 0.3 to 0.5 C deg for the larger examples, and 0.1 to 0.25 for those considered marginal. Results where no days exceed 0.2 or (1/40) segments exceed 0.05 C deg are considered "white noise" or random results. Another random aspect is that with diminishing size comes increased frequency and a more likely even distribution around the solar system, hence creating many cancelling elements of similar small signals randomly located around the orbital circle. In other words, even if there were hundreds of small signals, they would not be worth tracking because by random probability they would be cancelling each other out most of the time.

 

However, by case study, the net effects of the larger sets of signals could be fairly significant in the overall performance of this model. In the next section to be posted soon, I will show the actual results for the orbital period of Ceres, and compare that to Jupiter. You'll see that the results are quite similar. Then for Vesta, a slightly larger signal was derived, and I'll show that as well. The reason why it's larger is probably that it's close enough to Mars that it is combining interference with both Jupiter and Mars. I've noticed in my research results in general that the asteroids closest to the inner edge of the main belt are the most likely to "over-perform" relative to similar objects further out.

 

As to effects from any smaller, closer to earth asteroids, the results are frankly surprising as well as complicated. About half a dozen objects appear to be giving very large signals (especially large considering their small size) that compare to Venus or Mercury or even Mars (which we noted earlier has among the largest of all signals in this model). These signals appear real to me because they intensify sharply at times of closest approach. Without going into great detail, I can report that the signals are on the order of 5-10 times larger in the 10% of time when the objects in question are in their perigee positions (closest to earth) and also when they are closest to the Sun (which is often about the same time). There were also expected indications of retrograde motion at times when candidate objects crossed earth orbit and became closer to the Sun than the earth is (two objects studied always are, and therefore have constant retrograde signals of longer period than Venus).

 

The three most significant near-earth signals found so far belong to Eros (a 17-km object that orbits mostly between earth and Mars), Icarus (a smaller object that crosses our orbit frequently) and Geographos (a 5 km object that crosses earth's orbit and also goes well out into the asteroid belt). However, there were at least ten objects that appeared to be generating signals of at least 0.3 C deg near their earth-orbit transits and perihelia. And giving further evidence of a real physical effect, these signals tend to extinguish when said objects are further from the Sun and earth out in the asteroid belt, where objects of their size would not generate signals from case studies of regular-orbit asteroids.

 

So all of the above is quite an interesting "wrinkle" on this theory, and might even hold the key to upgrading the accuracy of these theoretical forecasts over time, although I sense a rather prolonged trial and error period before gains are consolidated. 

For now, then, I will leave it at that and return with graphs for Ceres and Vesta signals in a day or so

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Following up briefly on the S-field rotation example that I gave in the last post, two submissions to add here:

 

First of all, I checked the southern hemisphere analogue, which would be located east of Australia as timing line three curves through the equatorial zone near the Arabian Sea and then runs south of Java and through northern Queensland towards the Tasman Sea before dropping more due southerly to the South Magnetic Pole which is located on the Antarctic shelf near the Ross Sea and south of Tasmania.

 

This satellite imagery can be backed up several days if you want to see the same timing, but clearly, the same rotation is evident here, reflected through the equatorial plane.

 

http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/satellite/

 

Just FYI, timing line two runs down the west coast of Australia and timing line one is just slightly west of Kerguelen Island making it possible to study reflections of Toronto data in the southern hemisphere. The basic concept should anyone wish to follow up, is that everything would be a direct reflection in terms of timing (east-west) issues, and in terms of meteo-latitude, but the logic of inclination would be reversed ... that is to say, a feature that is prograde or retrograde at high latitudes in the northern hemisphere would be moving at relatively low latitudes in the southern hemisphere, and vice versa.

 

Also, I followed up the earlier analysis of the rotation over France and surrounding regions with this satellite image capture on 19th May with energy loops amd lunar positional analogues as of 00z on Sunday 19th May

 

post-4238-0-69524300-1369159911_thumb.gipost-4238-0-20211700-1369160796_thumb.gi

 

It's regrettable that we can't have a more interactive format in real time, perhaps that could be arranged one day, because the rotation and features are fairly evident in real time and somewhat more difficult to visualize in this theoretical after-the-fact reconstruction, but I can only do so much in this format.

 

Preparing some material for an overnight posting on the Ceres signals to start off the discussion on asteroid signals. Apparently Ceres lost its "asteroid" designation when Pluto lost its planetary designation, now both are in a separate category with Eris and a few other outer solar system objects as "dwarf planets" but to me, Ceres will remain asteroid number one. I've compiled some data on asteroid mass and size, and in both cases, Ceres represents about 20% of the total mass and surface area of asteroids, Vesta and Pallas being next in line. By the time you get to about 20th place in mass, you've exhausted two-thirds of the total mass believed to exist in the asteroid belt. The pecking order in terms of size drops off very gradually. Anyway, we'll get into all that in the final section of this thread, final that is to say before any discussion or modelling and forecasting applications. What could perhaps happen after that would be daily updates and discussions of interesting day to day features illustrating theory and practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Dear Roger

 

I have read with interest your research.  Thank you very much for the charts.  One in particular was very interesting.:  I have been working on the relative positions of the planets and their relationship with the weather and have an equation which I have been testing.  When I ran the equation for 31 December 2004 00:00 UTC+1 I got the following results, which seemed to fit with your chart:

 

 

As you can see, my graph appears to follow yours suggesting we are both on the right track.  I have different theories to you as to the mechanism by which our atmosphere and the planets are connected, so I will leave it there.  If you would like to go into more detail, please don't hesitate to drop me a line.

 

Best regards

 

Xihuitl

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
Posted
  • Location: Lincolnshire - 15m asl
  • Weather Preferences: Frost and snow. A quiet autumn day is also good.
  • Location: Lincolnshire - 15m asl
On 21/05/2013 at 19:27, Roger J Smith said:

Anyway, we'll get into all that in the final section of this thread, final that is to say before any discussion or modelling and forecasting applications. What could perhaps happen after that would be daily updates and discussions of interesting day to day features illustrating theory and practice.

Roger - I have not forgotten this thread. When I followed it back in 2013 it was simply too much too quick - I have no background in astronomy and while I was able to grasp the basics of lunar and planetary impact on pressure patterns via electro-magnetic forcings the complexity of variations lost me.

However I have spent as much ‘spare’ time as I have studying teleconnective forecasting and have started to become frustrated at the chicken/egg sense of things - that every global driver has an impact on another but without ever seeming to produce a sense of what really begins and ends particular weather processes.

My thoughts have therefore returned to your model. Did you ever get close to an e-book publication as you mentioned?

Anyway very gradually I am going to start picking apart each of your posts and may have questions as I go. Before I even start I’ll need to get to grips with some solar terminology - even words like perigee and declination leave me slightly off balance...but we will see how we go.

Your forecast for this year in the UK has once again been pretty accurate so far..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

No e-book yet, my research has been rather infrequently updated since I posted all this, in part because I gained access to some long-term pressure data for Ireland and I have been crunching that to examine possible better foundations for a working model which is what this research would need to be of real interest to the community. 

Although looking at some of the graphs in this study, you have to wonder why there isn't more interest in the general concepts, some are fairly robust looking considering what they are depicting (signals from outside the earth-atmosphere system and not directly related to the Sun either). 

So I don't know what's going to happen to this research, I am 68.6 earth years into the voyage and while healthy and reasonably alert, who knows how many more years one has available? And there's no person directly working on this with me, some people know about it and might be interested in taking on the research files if I were to pass, but nothing has ever been arranged or even discussed about that -- could this just slide back into total obscurity perhaps to be rediscovered (maybe by someone a little better able to explain the concepts) in who knows how many decades or centuries, or on the other hand, now that it's all :"out there" will somebody just scoop it up and finish off the process?

I would not mind that in particular, partly because the community needs this theoretical paradigm to unlock really effective ways of long-range forecasting, I believe, and also because at this point neither fame nor fortune seem to be relevant and in any case what would I do with either by the age of 75 or 80? Well I can think of a few things.

Full moon rising out my window, seems appropriate enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

Upload of recent research file, SLP over Irish Sea (54N 6W) for later discussion. Just trying the upload to see if my rather large file will be workable here. 

MSLP__A.xlsx

okay, that seemed to work ... Net-weather readers, I have a discussion thread open about this research on the Boards.ie weather forum, but their upload limit for excel files is very small. This file shows four-times-daily SLP readings for the grid point 54N 6W which is located northeast of Dublin in the Irish Sea, but close enough to the CET zone that analysis should be consistent with that discussion.

If you have a look in this excel file, here's a general guide. 

The dates and times are in columns D and E. The pressures (x100) are in column G. 

My analysis of daily averages through the year can be seen from column I to column S. 

Since it's four readings per day, the year lasts 1460 data points (or 1464 if a leap year) and all periods start in row 2 with row 1 reserved for titles. So the mean daily pressures are found in same date-time locations as the start year 1851 to leap year day, then leap year day (29 Feb) occupies the space of 1 Mar 1851, after which the rest of the year follows one day later than the 1851 date-time guides in columns D and E. 

Graphs to the right of this analysis show the results in terms of mean annual daily pressures. The main feature of interest besides the obvious annual cycle is the sharp fall in September when the Atlantic "kicks in" and creates considerably lower mean pressures.

As far as my research goes, this section is just a background setting to give the annual pressure trend. There might be some interesting second-order variations that I could study from the point of view of interactions between the Sun and other gravitational sources during the year. 

The more interesting portion of this excel file is the study of lunar effects on the annual pressure cycle, which appears from column AD to the end of this file. In that section, I reboot the averages to set them equivalent to the first year's lunar dates. It happens that the first new moon in 1851 was on the 2nd of January, so the lunations then follow with new moon at start and full moon around the middle date, taking 29.5 day segments. The data for all other years are adjusted to this timetable so that the first full moon of each calendar year is in the first lunation (this sets the first new moon somewhere between 16 Dec and 15 Jan). 

The data is allowed to run over from end of 12th lunations (approximately 354 days elapsed) to include those cases needed to return the data to appropriate starting points. The 13th lunation is therefore somewhat overlapping the 1st in terms of the range of dates that it covers. 

The results are shown in graph form for each of the 13 lunations, corresponding to the twelve months of the year with a slight forward adjustment moving down the series. 

I then show a comparative graph of annual pressure and lunar-adjusted annual pressure, which seems to indicate that the second-order variations evident in the annual series have a lunar event bias. There are a few exceptions to this but in general, some of the second order variations seem to have their origin in focused clustering of lunar events. This needs considerable further study to get a grasp on what exactly is being displayed in this correlation. 

Averages for the shorter sidereal (27.32-day) cycle can be seen in column BI and graph to the right of that. As southern Max in 1851 was right at the start of the year (one day before the new moon) that data runs from southern Max to next southern Max and places northern Max in the centre of the frame. 

As there is a discussion underway on the Irish site, I am going to link them into this graph (they were already linked into the thread earlier) and I will return to this thread from time to time to report on updated thinking about what this new research actually tells us.

There is another section not visible here in my own research excel file, analyzing pressure patterns for the solar system magnetic field components. That is equally interesting and I will post that in about a week or two when we are done discussing this part.

over and out ... 

Edited by Roger J Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-29 07:13:16 Valid: 29/03/2024 0600 - 30/03/2024 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - FRI 29 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    Difficult travel conditions as the Easter break begins

    Low Nelson is throwing wind and rain at the UK before it impacts mainland Spain at Easter. Wild condtions in the English Channel, and more rain and lightning here on Thursday. Read the full update here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-28 09:16:06 Valid: 28/03/2024 0800 - 29/03/2024 0600 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH - THURS 28 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather
×
×
  • Create New...