Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Roger Smith's developing LRF model


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: SE London Bromley
  • Weather Preferences: Very Cold with Fog, Frost and Snow all Hitting the Spot
  • Location: SE London Bromley

06z going very much towards the ECM, is this cold spell just a taster and not the real deal? Had a conversation with RJS and what is starting to be shown doesn't come as too much of a surprise now. Not saying its right but lets look at a couple of things here. ECM has edged slightly towards what GFS and UKMO were / are showing BUT not very much and has been rather stubborn [cannot be ignored]. GFS was bullish but now churns out a movement towards ECM [albeit the 06z]!,MetO not really interested in widespread snow, are they thinking along the lines that we will see some assault/attack from NW to edge the real cold air away?

RJS index model still shows a warming ahead before the real cold blocking structure and has and does remain a big thorn in my side re the outlook during Jan.

So with models still not agreeing I'm thinking we have some further hurdles to clear before we settle in to maintained/uninterrupted cold...oh and it looks like the far SE on this occasion isn't a favoured location.

UKMO - Solid output

ECM - slight movement, given way a bit but not enough for sustained deep cold

GFS - sided with UKMO solidly but has just jumped towards ECM

GEM - in UKMO camp

MetO - Global warmists so will seek the mild solution. Posted Image

BFTP

Sorry but not wanting to plough through hundreds of posts , who is RJS? Not that boy band -surely?

Update : Don't worry found it now.

Edited by AGAL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Weardale 300m asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow
  • Location: Weardale 300m asl

Sorry but not wanting to plough through hundreds of posts , who is RJS? Not that boy band -surely?

Roger J Smith — resides in British Columbia and got winter 2009/10 and 2010/11 nailed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Ayton, Berwickshire
  • Weather Preferences: Ice and snow, heat and sun!
  • Location: Ayton, Berwickshire

Roger J Smith — resides in British Columbia and got winter 2009/10 and 2010/11 nailed.

And if you read his full forecast, has been pretty reasonable so far this winter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Check the "seasonal forecast" thread in the main forum for that long-range forecast. This thread is for a discussion of the theory behind my forecasts and so far we have been looking at signals shown in the data from the interaction between the Moon and our atmosphere. I consider that to be something like 20-25 per cent of the total picture of the developing theory, the rest is what we will be looking at from now on,

Solar system magnetic field sectors

The general theory being developed has been reviewed in the introduction to this thread. To summarize, the solar system magnetic field which is essentially the solar wind in all of its complexity, is postulated to be a slightly variable entity as encountered by the earth at its orbital distance. While it would be very interesting to research and discuss what variations might occur at other distances, the fact is that our atmosphere gets carried around by the earth at 0.99 to 1.01 Astronomical units (AU) and whatever variations there might be in the solar system magnetic field in that orbital path will concern us more directly, as these could be transmitted from the near-space environment to the upper atmosphere to the lower atmosphere. This is in fact what many other weather researchers and enthusiasts are studying in a different form under such topic headings as stratospheric warmings, space weather, and probably also phenomena such as the JMO (Julian-Madden Oscillation) which I suspect are just concepts in my theory under different organizational paradigms. Perhaps near the end of this thread (which I would guess might be in late February) we could look at some overlaps in different research paradigms.

For now, I will just say that the basic theory holds that stronger field sectors, which are by rather obvious logic the sectors of enhanced solar outflow, warm at least specific portions of the atmosphere through ridge-building and higher jet stream latitude. What the research is attempting to unravel is what connection these sectors might have to planetary orbital dynamics, what predictable weather consequences follow, and in the specific research terms of analyzing CET and Toronto data, whether these effects are simultaneous or perhaps showing evidence of hemispheric transport. The original research concept developed quite some time ago (late 1980s) was that timing sector one in eastern North America received the direct signal more effectively due to its position in a strong section of the geomagnetic field (that due to the location of the NMP in northwest Canada) and then these signals were dispersed downstream (east) in prograde ridge and trough motions. To some extent, this seemed almost axiomatic given the well-known tendency for warmth in North America to show up in western regions about a month to two months ahead of when it often transfers east into central and eastern regions. But evidence is mixed for a global system, and the longitude difference between Toronto and Central England is such that a four-per-year system of warmings might look similar whether it was simultaneous or rotating (as 2/9 of a synodic year of either Jupiter or Saturn for example would equate to about three months). So research is needed on some intermediate point and I am looking at data from St John's Newfoundland to try to establish whether warmings near timing line one do in fact propagate east over time and reach timing line two (Newfoundland) and then three (Ireland-western UK) in predictable or systematic time frames, or alternatively, whether the warmings are more simultaneous and can be found at any standard lag time at the intermediate point.

Since the model is essentially statistical, it does not affect our understanding of process and forecasting to have this matter open to further study, the technique basically assumes that the future will look like a composite of the past, and the research is mostly about how to relate different factors and "index values" and how to handle long-term drift in the model due to changes in the magnetic field. In other words, how do we use the storehouse of past data to predict what future signals might be, at given locations?

As stated, the Moon works on this system but is not actually part of it -- the lunar effects are second-order variations within the signals we are now going to be discussing and unravelling.

We will start with the most obvious candidate for a modulator of solar system signals, Jupiter, the largest planet and the single most important gravitational attractor to the Sun. If there is variation to be found that has a cause in solar system dynamics, this would be the place to start looking. This was my assumption back around 1986 when after a few years of research into lunar signals, it was becoming obvious that some other cycles were in play and that the Moon was not responsible for them.

So here we go with a very detailed look at the research results for Jupiter's signals, and prepare to be surprised -- some of them are quite large compared to the lunar signals.

Introduction to Jupiter's orbital dynamics

The diagram below reveals some of the key elements of Jupiter's orbital dynamics, and shows some key locations for understanding how our research data will be presented.

Jupiter orbits at an average distance of 5.2 AU and its perihelion (4.95 AU) and aphelion (5.46 AU) are shown on the diagram. The orbit is moderately eccentric (.048) and this eccentricity is less than most other planets except Venus which has an almost circular orbit, and the earth which is closer to .02. The diagram shows the locations of ascending and descending nodes (lines drawn across the orbit), and locates the highest and lowest points in the orbit vs the ecliptic plane which is essentially the extension of our orbit into space. Now for some theoretical terminology that makes a lot of things much easier to explain as we go forward ... please take some time to master this concept for your greater understanding of the presentations of field sectors.

Rather than referring to right ascension or longitude my preference is to use a concept known as EOD (earth-opposition date) which is the extension into the solar system of positions taken by the earth on each day of the year. Now this position varies very slightly in absolute terms, a fact corrected by the system of leap year dates. But as a visualizing system, it is much easier to say that Jupiter is at "EOD 21 September" than to say it is at 0h RA or 0 deg longitude. (that is where the Sun would be seen at our spring equinox when earth is around 21 March). The diagram follows general convention in showing the orbits from above the north pole and with 1 Jan at the top of the circle. Direction is counter-clockwise. The grey line in the diagram extends through the current date (14 Jan) and also 16 July. Anything out beyond our orbit along that line would today be at EOD 14 Jan or 16 July depending on which side of the Sun it was.

Meanwhile, on the diagram, the 1772 orbital positions of Jupiter are shown in red. The middle dot is the 20 August opposition date (when earth passed Jupiter that year), and the other two dots show the 1-1-1772 and 2-3-1773 positions. These define the start and end of the first of eleven data groupings known as "J-years" ... the synodic period of Jupiter is 398.8 days and the range is 396 to 405 days. When we pass Jupiter near its perihelion (as we did in 2010-2011) it is moving faster and it takes a few days longer to catch up. When Jupiter is near its aphelion, it slows down enough to make the interval between opposition dates about ten days shorter. At present, we are in the intermediate position (see where we are from the blue dot on the orbit). We just passed Jupiter on 2 Dec 2012. Its EOD then was of course 2 Dec, today it is 6 Dec (if somehow the earth went back through time to its 2 Dec position, we would find Jupiter had moved on a bit).

The Jupiter orbital cycle takes 11.86 years, and there are 11 oppositions every 12 years (and 4-5 days) or more precisely, there are 76 oppositions in 83 years. In the next post, I will begin to explain how a concept of "J-field" sectors was developed, but for now, before moving on, assure that you have grasped how Jupiter moves around the solar system and if this is not clear, post questions. I am going to move on a couple of steps at a time, but not too many, I hope, each day. Here's the diagram of Jupiter's orbital dynamics:

post-4238-0-39561600-1358131615_thumb.jp

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

11.86 year temperature signal from Jupiter's mass effects?

Before we look at shorter cycles that occur every J-year (398.8 days) we should check to see what effect Jupiter may be having on the earth's atmosphere during its own longer "year" of 11.86 earth years. During that time, as explained, the planet reaches a high of +1.3 deg of inclination in the vicinity of EOD 6 April and a minimum of -1.3 deg at EOD 4 October just after the perihelion position. So in other words, Jupiter goes low, close and fast, then high, more distant and slow (in our northern hemisphere frame of reference, the southern hemisphere observer would see it the other way round).

It turns out that there is quite a large temperature variation over the 11.86 year period in the 240 years of the CET daily temperature data. I believe this extends further back into the monthly-only period 1659-1771 but have not produced the data yet.

The graph shows temperature anomalies for 155-day time intervals which reduces the 4340 days in 11.86 years to a scale comparable to lunar declination, and the graph has 28 intervals. On that scale, the effects of Jupter's latitude cycle are about three or four times larger than the Moon's effects with an amplitude of about 0.3 C deg, and individual days reach values well in excess of 1.0 deg C.

The period chosen departs from our usual convention to make this somewhat more relevant to the present time. Instead of starting with 1772, I have started this data set from 1763 (no data to 1772) so that the start point is also 1 Jan 2012. In other words, this signal tracks Jupiter around its orbital cycle from the position where it began the year 2012, about EOD 1 Nov. It is clear that Jupiter seems to have an effect on the earth's atmosphere. Note that the warmer half of the approximately 12-year cycle is the part between ascending node (to be reached about end of this year) and descending node (about 65% of the way through this graph's time frame). The coldest part is clearly where Jupiter is below the ecliptic around EOD Aug-Sep and, perhaps you already thought of this, about where it was in 2010, a much colder year than most recent ones. Going back 12 years from 2010 and adjusting after 36 to 47 ... 59 ... 71 ... 83 etc, we find

2010, 1998, 1986, 1974, 1963, 1951, 1939, 1927, 1915, 1903, 1891, 1880, 1868, 1856, 1844, 1832, 1820, 1808, 1797, 1785, 1773, 1761, 1749, 1737, 1716, 1704, 1692, 1680, 1668

Meanwhile, the tracking on the warmer period around descending node starting back from 2007 would then include 1995, 1983, 1971, 1960, 1948, 1936, 1924, 1912, 1900, 1888, 1877, 1865, 1853, 1841, 1829, 1817, 1805, 1794, 1782, 1770, 1758, 1746, 1734, 1722, 1711, 1699, 1687, 1675, 1663

The strongest part of the warming seems to begin about 1-2 years before descending node and would include the hot summers of 1911 and 2006 in the CET, but the above contains quite a few summer heat waves especially in North America (1900, 1936, 1948 had stronger heat waves relatively in North America than Europe).

I don't use any of this directly for long-range forecasting simply because all of it will find its way into the index values from more concentrated studies of Jupiter's orbital segments. But it does show a possible interaction and the scale is about the same as the Moon when only similar perigee cases are studied.

GRAPH BELOW shows the 11.86-year (4326d) cycle of CET temperature anomalies from the starting point 1 Jan of 1763, 1846, 1929 or 2012 in time intervals of 155d or 0.45y. The highest latitude of Jupiter is achieved in data range 11 and the lowest in data range 25.

post-4238-0-99909000-1358133577_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Jupiter's four-field structure (a concept developed around 1987-88 in my research)

Before I had computerized daily data on a large scale, I had publications of daily and monthly data from Toronto starting in 1841. In fact I did not even have a computer in my home until 1992, so this concept was worked out the old-fashioned way, on paper. However, data analysis makes it a lot easier to present and visualize.

It became clear to me that temperatures in the Toronto (and by correlation most of eastern North America) region were varying in a way that seemed related to Jupiter's orbital period. The synodic year of Jupiter (period between oppositions) averages 398.8 days and for most of the year we pass Jupiter about 13 months after the previous time -- when it begins to move faster in EOD July this period lengthens to about 13.5 months in autumn oppositions then it slides back in the winter months to the 13-month schedule.

By comparing times of warm and cold spells on hand-drawn graphs in 13.1-month "J-years" I worked out that there were four periods of warmings (at Toronto) that started near the opposition date, then came about 2 months, 6 months and 8 months after that. I also noticed that when Jupiter was near its perihelion, these periods increased somewhat. This led me to theorize that the solar system magnetic field might contain sectors of enhanced solar outflow or some kind of charged particle regime conducive to warming in sectors of the geomagnetic field. The sketch below shows where I expected those four sectors to be located in summer 2012 (used to illustrate one reason why I had predicted severe heat waves in parts of North America). I numbered them from the order in which they appear in space, but the order of earth encounter is somewhat counter-intuitively

2, 1, 4, 3

(or more correctly J-2, J-1, J-4, J-3)

The second graph (makes you sad to think this, the computer generated the data in about the time it takes me to say the word data, whereas I worked for about 4-5 years on the concepts over many semi-sleepless days) shows the temperature anomalies over the 398.8 day period of the "J-year" for Toronto.

The graph shows average temperature anomalies (C deg) over 10-day averages during that almost 400 day period, in 40 time intervals.

To make this data presentation comparable to the next section on the CET temperatures, I have adjusted the start point so that 1 Jan 1841 begins in column 9 rather than column 1. That pushes the first Jupiter opposition in the Toronto data (5 June 1841 or day 156) over to position 24 rather than 16 and matches where it will be for the CET analysis. Lines in the graph illustrate the timing of Jupiter's conjunction (where it's behind the Sun and over 6 AU from earth) and opposition (where we pass Jupiter and it could be as close as 4.0 AU if that's in late September or early October).

On the third graph, I have shown by labels the postulated signals of the four field sectors. Note that the separation is not always exactly the same in each segment of Jupiter's orbit. This means that our overall data analysis can only capture a rough approximation and any given segment can often display 2-4 times the amplitude of this homogenized average. Indeed, these 10-day averages run fairly close to the top and bottom ends of the graph

post-4238-0-58148200-1358135137_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-08661400-1358135197_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-16682100-1358135223_thumb.jp

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

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

J-field analysis from CET temperature data

As stated above, the 398.8-day "J-year" for the CET data places the first opposition date (20 Aug 1772) at day 233 or in column 24. The data for about 220 J-years show an amplitude of almost 0.3 degree © and individual daily data reach a maximum anomaly value of 0.5 deg C. The precision is greater in segments as will be demonstrated in the next section.

I have labelled the field warmings from the assumption of hemispheric prograde motion after initial creation of warming on timing line one. The lag time implied by comparison of this graph to the previous would be 3 months on average, or 3/13 of the overall period of the phenomenon, similar to the 2/9 difference in timing implied by timing line separation. These fractions are both about .23 but it should be noted that if you labelled each warming by one earlier field sector, the timing difference between Toronto and CET would then reduce to almost zero although there would be slight lags. Another theory to examine of course is retrograde motion, at present I am working on the assumption that retrograde field sectors are faster moving than the earth and are therefore the work of the inner planets.

Please note that at no time does this theory state or imply a transfer of heat from planets through space to the earth. It postulates an indirect process whereby planets modulate the solar system magnetic field and that in turn creates variations in our atmosphere. The transfer of energy is therefore electro-magnetic and not gravitational nor radiative.

GRAPH BELOW shows the 398.8 day CET temperature cycle starting from 1-1-1772 to end of 2011 fixing day 233 as Jupiter opposition date. This allows the conjunction date to wander in the data between about day 28 and day 38. Field warmings are labelled as explained in the text.

post-4238-0-76513400-1358137172_thumb.jp

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

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

J-year segments -- larger signals with better timing focus

The reader will appreciate that any gross signal based on all cases and all data will necessarily obscure some of the detail that might be available from a more case-oriented investigation of the data. One can create segment profiles that refer to specific ranges of opposition dates where the field sectors are flexed the same way (overall these data blur together cases where the J-1 and J-3 fields are flexed as much as 90 deg ahead and as little as 60 deg ahead of the Jupiter-Sun alignment, the variations for straight-line J-2 and J-4 sectors is less of an issue). Also one can isolate cases where Jupiter and Saturn are in similar orientations, as this seems to become a second-order variation factor in terms of field sector flex and also interaction. In fact, in a separate study which is somewhere in this science forum on NW, I have gone into the evidence that a Jupiter-Saturn interaction may modulate the solar variation cycle (the J-S period is 19.86 years with alignments every 9.93 years).

During active solar variation periods, the sunspot peaks occur as Jupiter approaches the alignments with Saturn or perhaps more significantly at the point where each planet will be in the other planet's field sectors. The double-peaked nature of most sunspot cycles may reflect the passage of Jupiter through two S-field sectors (at which point I theorize that its magnetic field is disturbed and emits a strong signal that causes the sunspot cycle to flare up). But this is not part of the present discussion, although it may answer the question "what about solar variation in your model?" I tend to view all three things as co-dependent. The cause and effect mechanism on the atmosphere is more to do with the field sector positions than the solar cycle although the enhanced bursts of energy may be a factor needing to be incorporated, and near the end of this thread after all other aspects are discussed, I will mention what the state of research is on that question.

Now, as to J-year segments, there would be eleven standard segments available from the research data, or you could customize a set as wide or as narrow as you wished to centre around a target year for a forecast. For example, for my 2012-13 forecasting I have been using analogues from Jupiter opposition years within 20 days of this year then comparing to a wider filter of 60 days. Then I have taken just the few years with other major players in similar positions to see if the signal shows predictable variations.

The graph below will illustrate how much larger a segment's amplitude can be, compared to the gross data (mean of all 240 years). The segment chosen is not quite the one used for this winter's forecast because it is mainly ahead of 2012-13 in the orbital cycle, from this year's position to next year's position. That would not be the best choice of an analogue set, but might be good in about 36 years from now. Just FYI and as a general rule, I do not use current data in any post-analysis, the segments remain pre-current-year until the post-analysis is done, then I update. Otherwise, some significant part of the data set becomes auto-correlated with the actual data.

Note in the example of the chosen J-year segment that the amplitude increases to over 1.0 C deg and two data points actually stray off the reservation of our 1.0-C standard grid. The upper escaper goes to +1.1 C and the lower goes down to -1.4 C. The set of data are generally warmer than average as this period approaches the minor warming in the longer cycle associated with ascending node. Thus the segment is generally warmer than the background overall data. Other segments are generally colder, for example, the one in the next section of this discussion (which I will post tomorrow) from a perihelion J-year segment related to 2010.

The segment shown runs from about early May 2012 through this winter and into mid-2013. You'll notice that there is a substantial cold spell in the J-year segment (light blues compared to the standard period dark blues). That seems to be the signal we are now experiencing. It was part of my thinking on a colder turn this winter, although timing considerations in the analogue set and other factors prompted me to speculate that the core of cold would be delayed a bit compared to what's shown here. You could look towards the right third of the graph to get some sense of what the J-field system has in store for CET values in spring and early summer 2013. At least one major warming is indicated.

GRAPH BELOW shows the previously presented J-year temperature profile (CET) over 398.8 days with a segment of data related to orbital positions similar to years in the range 1929 (2012) to 2001 from the research data files. This is not presented as a long-range forecast for 2013 CET values as a better analogue set is available in-house.

post-4238-0-92945400-1358138776_thumb.jp

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Update on field warmings in motion

I revisited the question of whether the J-field warmings at timing line one (over timing sector one really) are simultaneous with field warmings at other timing lines notably timing line three which is closest to the UK and Ireland, or, whether these warmings are then dispersed downstream.

Looking at several fairly prominent cases in the Toronto data such as Jan 1967 when the J-2 field warming produced a very mild period (record highs 23 and 25 Jan) followed by a very cold February, I found that the evidence was generally in favour of a downstream dispersion of warming. Of course that does not rule out the other option being part of the process, so at the moment, I am looking at the possibility that downstream locations receive both a field warming directly and the effects of the gradually moving downstream dispersion. In the 1967 case, the core of warmth was evident in Newfoundland in mid to late February and in the UK by mid to late March, with a second peak in mid to late April. Following archived maps on wetterzentrale, the dispersion seemed fairly regular in the location of the mid-Atlantic ridge in February heading generally east although with some second-order ebbs and flows.

Another item that has been clarified in the past few hours by some new insight is that there may very well be a cylindrical effect to these field warmings, wherein the signal is strongest during ingress and exit from the field sectors (which are three-dimensional). Some indirect evidence of this, beside a twin-peaked nature to many field warmings, is that when Jupiter gets relatively high or low in its orbital inclination, the warmings are confined to narrow and brief intervals as if perhaps we are not going through a cross-section but scraping the outer edges of the cylinder. This can be illustrated in the next section as I propose to take a leisurely stroll through the J-field segments (all eleven of them) relating that to the weather over the past twelve years.

J-field segments in CET temperature data

A J-field segment is defined as being any grouping of J-field temperature signals over a defined range of Jupiter oppositions. We have discussed that these occur every 12 years at similar dates that move forward 4-6 days, and how that leads to an 83-year period in which similar J-years can be found 12, 24, 35 and 36, 47 and 48, 59, 71 and 83 years into the past (and so on, extending back as far as the data). In my research files, I grouped the data in that way to create segments and placed the next 12 years including 2013 near the middle of the range for future use. This means that the past twelve years sit fairly close to the centre of each segment also, although ending in 2012 they are in the position of a year 71 rather than 83 as the next series will become. That makes little difference, the segments seem to change rather gradually and even when you compare neighbouring non-overlapping segments you can see similarities.

What we're going to do then is to look at all eleven of the segments (we already looked at the current one) and relate the signals to temperature trends over the past decade (I should say in this century).

The first segment is labelled 2009-10 and includes years with August oppositions, as Jupiter is moving down and faster towards its lowest inclination and perihelion (those both occur in the next segment). These segment graphs are on a smaller scale with a larger range from +2.0 to -2.0 C deg because some of the data reach the higher part of the 1.5-2.0 anomaly range. Remember these are 10-day averages. The graph for 2009-10 is mostly comparable to 2009 and only the last 3.5 bars include 2010 data. The other years in the segment will have slightly different ranges because the fixed point is the Jupiter opposition which in this case was 14 August. This segment also includes the start year of 1772 so you can easily locate this segment on the earlier diagram, it will be just about the same as 1772 (red dots) as shown. The other years in the segment include

1772,1784,1795,1796,1807,1819,1831,1843,1855,1867,1878,1879,1890,1891,1902,1914,1926,1938,1950,1961,1962,1973,

1974,1985,1997,2009

(and the first month or so of the following year at the end)

post-4238-0-10017900-1358220517_thumb.jp

Looking at the segment graph, one thing that is fairly evident is that temperatures are generally on a decline in sync with Jupiter's gradual drop in latitude. This halts temporarily during field warmings after opposition. The J-1 and J-4 warmings that we expect to see after conjunction (broken vertical line) are both quite muted in the overall data. One time when that rule was evidently broken would be 1974 but note that was an early case in the segment (Jupiter's inclination not as low as average for the segment). A fairly good sample of cold or very cold winters overlaps the first portion of this segment (1784, 1795, 1855, 1891 and as it turned out 2009). Mild winters falling in this range would probably have field sectors other than J-field as their cause. The North American winters in this set would be closer to average and contain more mild examples (1950 in east).

Summers of these years would be generally cool in most cases (CET).with a warming tendency towards the end as J-3 field warming developed. The autumn becomes warm and the J-2 field arrives a bit earlier than the overall profile, indicating greater flex of the J-2 and J-1 couplet at this time. (Remember that all these field labels are based on the moving field sector analysis, the J-2 field warming hits timing line 1 around July of these years a bit ahead of opposition).

This segment ends with the January of following years and that would include cold ones like 2010 and 1963 as well as the winter of 1890-91. The second year portion of the graph is highlighted with a yellow background. This will move further into the graph in each segment as the J-year of 398.8 days overtakes the earth year.

Moving on to the second segment, labelled 2010-11, this one is even colder in general and includes the portions of the Jupiter orbit where the planet reaches minimum inclination of -1.3 deg (about column 25) and perihelion (about column 36). This being the fastest part of Jupiter's orbit, the range of oppositions is somewhat larger, about a month and a half from early September to mid-October.

The four field warmings are fairly prominent but brief at least in the J-1 and J-4 cases early in the segment, and also later than the overall timing. This could indicate both flex and the effects of motion in space being accelerated by Jupiter's faster motion.

Years in this segment include the Feb to Dec of

1773,1785,1796,1797,1808,1820,1832,1844,1856,1868,1879,1880,1891,1892,1903,1915,1927,1939,1951,1962,1963,1974,

1975,1986,1998,2010

and the Jan to Mar of the following years.

post-4238-0-16539200-1358221059_thumb.jp

The brief warming of the J-4 field sector corresponds to mid-April of these years. A longer warming with the J-4 sector overlaps July of these years. Otherwise the first half of these years is generally cold (average data, individual years may vary). A cold early autumn pattern can be seen around the time of opposition (21 Sept 2010). North American data include mainly warm to hot summers but a few very wet ones, the overall impression is that on J-field alone the jet stream is only lifted slightly from its normal position, to go for a hot, dry summer you would want to see other warming factors.

The J-2 field warming (CET data) that was probably responsible for the very mild start to Nov 2010 is prominent, and in some years this field warming gives very warm weather in October in eastern North America; then comes a colder period that was evidently part but not all of the story behind the very cold periods in late Nov and most of Dec in both 1890 and 2010. Into the first two months of the following years (such as 2011) a notable warming takes place earlier than the overall average timing of the J-1 field sector, which is normally into the next segment. This may be part of a wider field warming at Jupiter's perihelion that would be even more prominent if the field sector were not running generally lower than earth orbit. This wide J-1 field warming can also be seen in the the years in this segment in North American data. Long periods of near-record warmth occurred in Dec 1974 and Jan 1975 for example, also in 1997-98. A colder Feb 1986 in CET data would have had its causes in other factors as there is nothing in this segment to suggest it. I think we'll uncover what that was eventually in this thread, and it's a good example of why these J-field segments should not be confused with predictions or full modelling, these are just index values and must be placed into a mixture of many others. However, I do think that the J-field segments are the largest single component and may account for about 15-20 per cent of the variance in temperatures.

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

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

Okay, I hope people are not overwhelmed with too much detail in these segments, the only real point of showing them in all this detail is to provide interested readers with a resource for future use once you get the drift of the model in a more complete form. My actual use of J-field segment data is always customized anyway, these charts are interesting to compare but the long-range forecasts will generally rely on a custom analogue set that includes the segment in question but perhaps weighting some years differently and also adding a few cases that are more distant in terms of Jupiter's orbital position but more similar in some other set of variables such as Jupiter-Saturn interaction or various other identified factors.

I will slog on through the entire eleven segments and perhaps finish them off in three posts. But if you find it TMI then come back in a few days when I move on to the next topic which will be S-field sectors (Saturn's signals analyzed from a similar perspective). I will not be posting a lot of segments with that, in part because I haven't finished that study and because the only use I have made so far of this index value would be the immediate analogues in a fairly narrow range.

So we've looked at the two orbital segments that correspond to 2009, 2010 and the first part of 2011. You've probably grasped that each of these will include a larger part of a second year as we move forward, and so the yellow hatching on the graph will expand from the right to include more and more of each graph. But at some point towards the end of that, I switch the yellow hatching to the retreating end of first year on the left.

The next segment up is analogous to about March 15 2011 to about end of April 2012, and similar (not exactly the same, Jupiter dates are in a range of about 30 days) for these years and the winter and early spring that follow them ...

1774,1786,1797,1798,1809,1821,1833,1845,1857,1869,1880,1881,1892,1893,1904,1916,1928,1940,1952,1963,1964,1975,

1976,1987,1999,2011 (plus first four months of following years)

post-4238-0-02499300-1358336191_thumb.jp

These years have opposition dates in later October (e.g. 29 October of 2011) or early November. At this point, Jupiter is moving slowly up towards our orbital plane and it has just passed perihelion so these are another set of close encounters where you might expect J-fields to be wider, stronger and now, not so far below the earth's south pole as the last set. And this shows up in a much warmer segment than the past two. Conjunction dates in the first part of the segment would be mostly in April and so it's no surprise that the very warm April of 2011 is represented by a strong warming (but remember, it's in the data set, so what I had to look at before that month would be perhaps 85% as strong a signal as what you're seeing for use in 2023 -- don't forget). Those would be J-1 field segments from the previous opposition coming downstream from North America. Meanwhile, eastern North America in this segment is being toasted by a very warm J-4 field signal that gave record warmth in April of such years as 1892, 1928, 1952, 1963, more like Feb 1975 (an early member of the set and apparently with more flex), then April 1976, in particular April 1987 (both of those years had trees out in full leaf 3-4 weeks early and 32C heat waves in April), and I wasn't around for 1999 or 2011 so I would have to look them up (bet they were warm too).

That J-4 segment would arrive over the UK by summer of these years and in this case it seems to be a continuous 3-4 month warm signal from the spring to the summer in the CET. I would say that 1975, 1976 and 1999 were the best contributors to this accumulated warm signal. The segment then goes colder for much of the autumn and at that stage, North America is in a warm J-2 segment that has been record warm in some cases that are included here and almost always able to produce at least a few near-record days in October and November. Summers in this segment over eastern North America are warmed rather less than Aprils by the J-3 sector and this arrives over the UK by about Sept-Oct bringing temperatures just a bit above normal on average. I would suspect from that signal that a segment year without much other warming available from the many other index values could be a zonal near normal sort of autumnal pattern, with a bit of help this could on the other hand turn into a warm autumn for some years. These ebbs and flows in field sector intensity are an ongoing mystery that I am trying to decode, there may be some sort of critical wavelength issue involved using exact distances and flexes which influence elapsed time. I have come to think of these sector positions as lagged relative to Jupiter as if we're seeing the cumulative effects of 6-12 months of Jupiter-Sun interactions. I suspect that Mars may sometimes disrupt a J-field sector by moving through it. Mars has a similar orbital inclination to Jupiter so it is always ploughing through J-field sectors on its 1.88 year orbital cycle.

Moving on here, the warm Oct-Nov J-2 field sectors over North America reach the UK in the following winters around Jan of years that are one higher than the list above (see the list for the next sector if you don't want to do the math in your head). I found that this tendency begins to fade rapidly towards the later Jupiter positions in this sector such as 1917, 1929. Those were cold winters in general more like the next segment. And we saw last winter how Jan 2012 was rather mild but then Feb turned a lot colder. So this warm signal seems to be prone to fading later in the segment and this is why a segment alone is not always a good basis for a long-range forecast.

In North America, the J-1 field sector arrives by these same winters and there are quite a few cases where January is very cold then February much warmer (as in 1857, 1881, 1976 and 1977). This particular segment has the greatest forward flex of the J-1 field segment, showing a slight lag to Jupiter's orbital speed which peaked in the previous segment. The 1976 case was almost four months forward in space from the alignment. The overall average is about 2.5 months.

----------------

Now, moving to segment four which we have already looked at once, 2012-13 and these years from about April onward and including about five months of the following years in each case:

1775,1787,1798,1799,1810,1822,1834,1846,1858,1870,1881,1882,1893,1894,1905,1917,1928,1941,1953,1964,1965,1976,

1977,1988,2000,2012

post-4238-0-00192600-1358336219_thumb.jp

The range of opposition dates is mid-November to near the end of December, this past year 2012 had a mid-range opposition date of 2 December. We already discussed this current segment in some detail, but just briefly, the segments have generally warm summers from the J-1 field segments, while North America is often baking in a very warm J-4 as with 2012 (1988, 1977 and 1953 were hot ones as well) for the CET this past case seemed to be under considerable attack although it showed these warmer tendencies in August and in general this particular case must be flagged as hit or miss. Not everything in this research model is fully clarified yet, and signals from one source can get overwhelmed in particular cases by other factors.

This segment has a fairly reliable autumn warming in the CET data from the travelling J-4 sector and another one timed for about March from the J-3, in between is where we are now in a fairly strong cold signal (that -1.5 bar is the largest 10-day cold anomaly in this series). My LRF spoke about increasing cold in January then a cold February mainly because several other cold signals follow this J-field signal, and I think this is why we are seeing a battleground set-up so far, the other signals which are mainly retrograde have not arrived yet (they are massing in Russia now). This is why I am now especially concerned about a possible epic cold period to come this winter.

Also note that winter 1739-40 is in this later part of segment and can be considered part of the analogue set (Jupiter dates were 8d earlier in Gregorian calendar cf 1739 and 2012, opposition was 24 Nov -- it's my understanding that CET records are adjusted from observations in Julian calendar to data in Gregorian calendar dates). Other major cold spells in the analogue set (look down to the next segment to see the winters in question) include 1776, 1799, 1895 and 1942.

In the North American data this segment produces a lot of rather mild winters (Feb 1930 and 1954 have many record highs) as the J-2 sector occupies much of Dec and is still off the east coast in Jan but there can be high variability as in 1977-78 and a tendency to colder spells late January as we're about to see this winter. This warm J-2 sector would be expected to arrive in Britain around late March into April. At that time, North America is in a warm portion of the cycle courtesy of the J-1 segment but some cases were rather weak such as late Feb early Mar 1965. We'll see in the next segment how this J-1 field does for the CET temperatures.

_____________

Final post for today, segment five in our series would be 2013-14 but as those are all in the future I have jogged back to 2001-02 as the label. The timetable is on the same logic as before, running from about mid-May of these years to about late June of the following years:

from May onwards in 1776,1788,1799,1800,1811,1823,1835,1847,1859,1871,1882,1883,1894,1895,1906,1918,1930,1942,1954,1965,1966,1977,

1978,1989,2001,2013 (and six months of following years)

post-4238-0-31677900-1358336248_thumb.jp

These are years with either a very late December opposition date as in 1965,77,89 and previous or no opposition date until the following year as with this year (the segment will have an opposition date of 5 Jan 2014).

The segment starts off with a rather weak J-1 field warming in May to July of these years, we'll see later this year how that plays out. A cool spell follows in the data for much of these years in their late summers. For the summer of 2013 to become a really hot one, it will need help from some other signals. Meanwhile, eastern North America around the June conjunctions can expect some rather weak warming from J-4 sectors on average, this segment starts to become a lot weaker in producing major warmings than the past two had been (in the overall data).

However, there is a peak in the overall temperature signal evident in the CET data and this seems to be associated with ascending node, during about the middle third of this signal Jupiter is moving up through the earth's orbital plane (in the northern max position too, so that lunar JC events are coincident with Northern Max and winter full moons).

Those J-4 sectors arrive in the UK data around October of these years and there seems to be a fairly long warming signal that fades to a cold December (just before the opposition which as I hope you've gathered is that vertical green bar just right of centre in the graph with a big letter "O" as a label).

The J-3 field warmings are generally not too strong for cases around September of these years in North America but turn into rather mild winter signals for the next January in the CET data. This is the warm signal just after opposition in the graph. At this point North America would be getting J-2 field warmings some of which were fairly impressive (Jan 1906 -- 22 C in southern Ontario on 24th of January -- as well as Dec 1965 and Jan 1967 at either end of the range of this segment both near record warm and both followed by much colder months). In 1989 the J-2 field arrived just about at the Jupiter opposition after a very cold interval in December, then January 1990 was quite mild.

This J-2 warmth was studied in detail as I mentioned back a few posts during early 1967 and I would invite anyone interested to look at maps on wetterzentrale and track the warm ridge east from east of North America at the end of the field warming (25 Jan 1967 recorded 16 C in Toronto then a snowstorm followed on 27th as well as a bitterly cold February). You'll see how this warming moves gradually east across the Atlantic and shows up in Britain in mid to late March 1967 concluding in April 1967. This is probably a case of a passage through the cross-section of a cylindrical field sector given the proximity to ascending node. The beginning and end of this field warming were the warmest times. Somewhat colder weather occupied the interval between.

By the spring of these years, North America gets a moderately warm J-1 signal that is often not as impressive as the previous J-2. Perhaps rising inclination is the reason for this, but quite often temperatures do little better than to reach near normal for a given month such as April 1967 then a very cold month follows. J-1 flex is now noticeably less than in previous segments and may account for the late spike of warmth in this graph, normally we have been seeing the J-1 CET warming in the first parts of segments, but here we see evidence of warming about a month earlier. We'll see if this trend continues in future segments (will be posting those either later or tomorrow).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

By Jove, I shall continue ...

We now move on to the sixth J-field segment which includes years with mostly February opposition dates, and run from approximately early-mid June of these years to July of following years (in which the oppositions occur) ...

from July onwards in 1778,1790,1801,1802,1814,1824,1836,1848,1860,1872,1883,1884,1895,1896,1907,1919,1931,1943,1955,1966,1967,1978,

1979,1990,2002,2014 (and seven months of following years)

post-4238-0-18584300-1358403722_thumb.jp

The rest of these summers average below normal in the CET data, despite 1955 and 1990 being in the group. I suspect therefore we will be finding other signals mainly responsible for those warm summers. Meanwhile in North America, these summers under the J-4 warming are generally rather hot and dry with numerous daily records although no monthly records. This is another mark against simultaneous warmings as the main theory of J-field warmings.

Despite that, the eventual arrival of the J-4 signal is a weak warming to near normal with one late spike around November of these years in the UK CET. Meanwhlle over North America the J-3 warming tends to pick up soon after this set of J-4 summers to provide a long warm autumn as well. September 1931 was notably hot but the signal in general is about +1.5 C (North American field signals tend to be 2-3 times as strong as those in the CET, in part because of a more variable continental climate with larger air mass distinctions).

Into the winters that occur in the middle portions of this segment, the J-3 warming signal appears fairly strong and long-lived, so we might expect many of these winters to be mild around late January with some cold spells indicated by February and more warmth by March. I can see one counter-example, 1991 (don't forget to add one to the numbers in the list, or look down to the next segment, to get Jan and Feb years). Some day when I get time I should get a list of counter-examples and study the causes but I haven't finished correlating back data yet in any case. However as stated a few times, this is but one of many signals, perhaps the largest particular item in the agenda but only postulated to cause 15-20 per cent of overall variance. So if you get enough strong cooling signals opposing, then this one warm signal can be crushed (it might give a clue to precipitation potential however).

Now in these same winter seasons, the J-2 field warming is quite evident in the North American data. Jan 1932 is the warmest on record at Toronto, and Jan 1991 was very mild, as was the straddle case of 1967 (a straddle case in this instance is a year that is part of two adjacent segments, Jan 1967 was in the previous segment as well -- to do the analysis, you have to jog back at some point and to smooth that jog I have used two years around the mid-point -- this also widens the segments to provide a smoother comparison).

These J-2 warmings appear to arrive in April in the UK CET, with the warm signal shown in data bars 28-30. At this time, North America is in the J-1 warming although that is centered a bit earlier on late March. Following the warm signal in April, there is quite a notable cool period in the UK CET data corresponding to May and June of these years, then the J-1 signal arrives near the end of the segment in July. At this point North America is still in a rather cool pattern prior to the J-4 signal.

----------------

We now move on to the seventh segment which begins late in July of the following years and runs to about August of the following years.

from August onwards in 1778,1790,1801,1802,1813,1825,1837,1849,1861,1873,1884,1885,1896,1897,1908,1920,1932,1944,1956,1967,1968,1979,

1980,1991,2003,2015 (and seven months of following years)

These are cases with mostly March oppositions (in the following years).

post-4238-0-50438400-1358403740_thumb.jp

The segments begin with an overall rather weak J-1 warming (CET data) and given the presence of 2003 the rest of the group must have averaged not much higher than a zero anomaly. In North America there is a tendency for these summers to have a warmer August than July (1944 in particular) as the J-4 warming develops around conjunction.

That J-4 warming arrives about late October in the CET data, after about two months of a colder signal. In North America this would be about the timing of the J-3 warmings which appear fairly strong in the overall data.

Another cold spell can be expected in November and January of the winters in this segment (CET data) with December somewhat milder as the J-3 warming arrives. This was very enhanced in 1837-38 with the coldest period of CET winter data in mid-January of that winter. A second and presumably main portion of that J-3 sector may account for the February-March warmer signal in the data. Toronto data show a strong warming late in these winters (e.g. 1981) lasting well into March, from the J-2 field sector. This includes a record warm spell in late January of 1909 and a mild winter overall in 1920-21 and 1932-33. The segment is highlighted by a record warm March in 1945.

Towards the end of this segment Jupiter is near aphelion and its highest latitude (above our orbital plane). Field warmings near the end of this segment and in the next segment (assuming a 6-12 month lag effect) will show the greatest evidence of any tendency for J-fields to miss the earth on the high side (above the north pole). This may show up in the Toronto data for about May-June of these years when the J-1 field is expected, the data show only a modest peak at best. But for the CET, the stronger J-2 warming already received upstream hits with the usual intensity around this same time in the UK, so the early summers of the years in the segment continue the warm signal of the spring months. The mid-summer is generally close to normal. At this ponit Toronto data would be mainly between field segments and these are in fact rather cool summers overall. 1992 was a very poor summer in Ontario and it was blamed on Pinatubo which at the time seemed implausible to me given that Pinatubo had such a minor dust veil in a period of general warming. I blame it more on J-field absence.

___________________

Now we can move on to field segment eight, which involves periods from about late August of these years to about September of following years. The oppositions are mainly in April of the second year:

1779,1791,1802,1803,1814,1826,1838,1850,1862,1874,1885,1886,1897,1898,1909,1921,1933,1945,1957,1968,1969,1980,

1981,1992,2004,2017

into nine months of following years

post-4238-0-35907600-1358403798_thumb.jp

The J-1 warmings from the previous segment may have been weak at arrival in North America but apparently they may have arrived somewhere else in the system because they arrive with considerable strength in the UK CET as shown in the early portion of this new segment (corresponding to the Septembers of the above years). Around October of these years, another generally weak warming occurs in the Toronto data, Stronger cases are near the early range of opposition dates such as 1897 and 1980. Further research is needed (making a note) on this detail, as to where in the grid the high-inclination J-field warmings are received, because as this segment shows, the UK CET data run warm although more variable than any other segment (perhaps receiving a blend of upstream variability).

What had been a weak J-4 warming at Toronto around October arrives as a strong warming in the UK around November -- this is also faster than most cases which may give a clue as to where the warming actually hits the earth (near timing line two perhaps). This will require some investigation. But these winter seasons then decline into a sharp cooling trend that overlaps November and part of December before a major warming trend before New Years into January. That would be part two of the J-4 warming. About this same time North America is into another rather anemic J-3 signal that rarely gets temperatures above normal. That is often followed by intense cold in Januaries or even winters in general of the segment (1875 and 1982 were very cold, as was Feb 1934 and Feb 1993).

The UK winters generally seem to get colder towards February as was the case in 2005. The weak North American signal from J-3 appears to arrive in the spring but does not get particularly warm in the UK either.

Springs of this segment (following years) can have a strong J-2 field warming as in 1946 in North America. This signal seems rather hit or miss and this may also be true for the June warmings of rather brief duration as shown in the CET data in the graph. By that time, a J-1 warming in North America would be timed for late June and July -- the data set seem to be a mixture of missing cases, brief hot spells (very brief in 1969 but the last day of May managed to set a new monthly record between two rather cool months). This signal comes closest to being a total miss of the earth if we assume that it is supposed to fall into timing sector one.

________________________

We now move on to segment nine of the J-field which has mostly May oppositions, and which runs from about mid September of the years listed, to mid Octobers of the following years.

from September onwards in 1780,1792,1803,1804,1815,1827,1839,1851,1863,1875,1886,1887,1898,1899,1910,1922,1934,1946,1958,1969,1970,1981,

1982,1993,2005,2016 (and seven months of following years)

post-4238-0-50015700-1358403848_thumb.jp

During this segment, Jupiter is moving down towards our orbital plane and notice that this is in general quite a warm segment.

The first detail of note is that the missing or weakened J-1 warming from the previous segment still shows up in considerable intensity as with the last similar case, by the Octobers of these years.

About that time, J-4 warmings in North America could be generally described as weak through the autumn months (conjunctions are around late October), This is about the end of the interval of weaker North American J-field warmings.

Those same J-4 warmings arrive in Dec-Jan of the segment and I recall a lot of talk about even larger teapot and Bartletts in Dec 2005 and Jan 2006 (on NW, I joined in September 2005). A much colder interval is shown in the data corresponding to the severe winter of 1947 and also the particular case of 2006, later February into early March and unlike that year seems to repeat in the general run of data in April. This would be a winter of J-3 field warmings in eastern North America, and in general, this set is more impressive than the earlier missing cases although few records are set. However, 1981-82 and 1993-94 join earlier cases with largely missing J-field warming. With the El Nino, the 1982-83 case was very mild at times (mostly before New Years).

In the spring of these years, just ahead of a May opposition date, a warm J-2 interval can be expected in eastern North America, and the J-3 warming arrives in the UK but now it's the UK service that seems disrupted, the only evidence of this field is a weak spike at opposition.

The warm J-2 set (again not overly strong in general) seems to become intense in this segment when it crosses the Atlantic. Summers such as 1911 and 2006 have set records for heat only equalled in a few cases (and July 2006 remains the warmest month in the CET data). 1947 was another quite warm summer in the group. The fact that 1816 is in the group is probably more down to Tamboro than anything to do with Jupiter.

These same summers have more impressive (than previous cases) J-1 field warming in North America and that arrives in the UK during the autumn of such years as 1947 and 2006 bringing a warm September that may continue into a warm October.

_________________

For segment 10, we are dealing with the following years, and since the segments begin about mid to late October, I have now started to colour-code the "second year" with the smaller portion of the first year, so the yellow hatching that was marching across the graphs from right to left is now only on the left. These are segments with June opposition dates, and towards the end of this segment Jupiter is at descending node (moving down through our orbital plane, and at the southern max position, therefore JC events in this segment approach coincident timing with S Max and winter new moons, summer full moons). Those are additional warmth-promoting factors as getting stronger such events can generally prolong warm spells.

from late October onwards in 1781,1793,1804,1805,1816,1828,1840,1852,1864,1876,1887,1888,1899,1900,1911,1923,1935,1947,1959,1970,1971,1982,

1983,1994,2006,2018 (and eleven months of following years)

post-4238-0-82843000-1358403875_thumb.jp

The warmth already established in the autumn at the end of the previous segment then continues with little interruption through the following winters indicating a broad J-1 field warming that is spreading into the J-4 warming from upstream (a rather strong signal that includes a record warm October in 1947 in Toronto and similar cases in 1900, 1971. That arrives in the UK around December of this list and January of this segment (adding one year to the list above) as in 2006-2007. The overall signal here is for a colder end to winter and a cool spring. J-3 warming over North America is rather weak in this set, and also when it comes time to arrive in the UK data. Possibly we are seeing a solar eclipse factor due to the nodal factor combined with conjunction.

The general run of data past opposition and through the J-2 and J-1 field warming intervals seems anemic in general, the North American data show low variability and a strong near-normal clustering, and as with summer 2007, the energy of J-field warming seems to go more into rainmaking in the UK. Novembers become generally quite warm as upstream J-1 warming from about August arrives. This may be a set needing more study of warming signal trajectory and strength as the results are somewhat less distinct for about half a year May-Oct.

______________________

Finally, segment eleven of the data takes in small amounts of later parts of the years we have been discussing above, and all of the next year to the end of December, so just for this segment, I have listed the years by the second of the two years ...

1783,1795,1806,1807,1818,1830,1842,1854,1866,1878,1889,1890,1901,1902,1913,1925,1937,1949,1961,1972,1973,1984,

1985,1996,2008,2020 (and eleven months of following years)

post-4238-0-14231600-1358403915_thumb.jp

These are years with July and early August opposition dates. It appears to be a rather warm segment in general with a sharp cooling trend later on.

It had been noted that J-1 warming was underway in Novembers of previous years (to the above list) and this continues into December. In North America, J-4 warmings would begin around December and last into the Januaries of the years listed. Some cases are fairly impressive (1889-90, 1949-50) and others rather bland, the overall average is about +1.5 C (Jan 1950 was third warmest on record for Toronto).

Although on the whole a mild set of CET winters, this group managed to include super-cold Jan 1795 so either that J-field signal got blocked or all of this warmth somehow crept into the segment from non-J-field sources. I am going to be alert to any indication of either. But it's interesting that a blocked J-field occurred at an odd time in the solar cycle near the long decline of an unusually long solar cycle and before the Dalton minimum set in. However, I suspect this must be a case where almost every other factor was tilted towards cold and the J-field was overwhelmed in large-scale height crashes that must have occurred that winter.

The one very cold period in the graph by the way would correspond to about mid-March for 1795. Now, for North America, the early spring months of the above years would see a J-3 warming and this one has been rather subdued with averages near +1.0 in a period from about mid-March to late April. That warming shows up in Britain about late May into early June, backs off for a while then intensifies in late summer.

Summers in North America in this segment can be quite unsettled, the field warmings are weak and this seems to promote humidity more than heat. 1854 and 1949 were hotter and drier than most of these other years, and 1925 caught an early J-2 warming that gave a brief intense heat wave around 1-10 June. This set of warmings appears in the UK data around late September or for later opposition dates early October but does not leave much of an impression on the overall data except of course in 1985 when some other factors must have assisted.

Now we are reaching the end of both this discussion and perhaps our ability to absorb more detail. Warmings in the autumn of these years in eastern North America (J-1) are generally moderate and would show up in the first segment that we discussed (2009-10). There it was noted that the expected J-1 warming in CET data was "muted" and in fact the first 100 days of that segment appear generally below normal.

I may take a break from posting on Friday morning and resume with a new topic, S-fields, on the weekend. That report won't go into as much detail and can probably all be posted in one go.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Before moving on, another look at the lunar events

This is a good time in the lunar cycle to talk about lunar events -- on Tuesday morning around 0300h the Moon moves past Jupiter, and this in our system is the JC event. Notice where Jupiter is in the sky, above Aldebaran, one-half of the two similar "A" event stars. Within a day or two, the Moon then moves past the head of Orion and across the galactic equator, Milky Way and source of the N Max energy.

Now, we have discussed the lunar events in some detail, but I have worked up this graph to illustrate my research directions in trying to understand what scaling is involved in what I presume to be some kind of gravitational interference pattern. The process appears to work on a scale more similar to gravitational energy (M/R) than gravitational force (M/R^2), and as will be illustrated in the graphs below, the best fit for similar lunar event energy as applied to the mass and distance of source is a rather complex one, fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance (M^0.25 / R^0.2). This is illustrated in the graph which shows both mass and distance to logarithmic scale, taking the mass and distance of Jupiter (from the earth, not the Sun) as unit values. The actual mass of Jupiter is 2 x 10^27 kg compared to the earth's 6 x 10^24, a ratio that more exactly is 318:1, or in logarithmic terms, about 2.5 log units. Earth is not shown on this graph because it receives these signals and there is no "earth event" in the system, but the mass of Venus can be increased by 0.1 log unit if you want to visualize the mass of earth to scale here. The solar mass is about 3.1 on this log scale (just over 1,050 times that of Jupiter). The stars that we mention in relation to lunar events are all in the range of 2 to 30 solar masses (and most of them are binary systems or greater).

The distance to Jupiter is (at closest approach) on the order of half a light-hour which itself is 1/48 of a light-day or 1/(48 x 365.25) of a light-year. That makes a light year about 48 x 365.25 times the distance to Jupiter (4 A.U.) which equates to about 17,532 times as great, or in log terms about 4.3 ... so 100 light years on that scale is 6.3. The distance to the centre of the galaxy at 30,000 light years would be 8.8 on the log scale. The mass of the galaxy would be about 14 on the mass scale, we will use a scaled fractional value of mass 12 and distance 9 that will include partial contributions from less massive but much closer Sirius and stars in and near Orion for the N Max event. The S Max event can be visualized as the same point.

The graph shows you three basic sets of relations -- the mass and distance of objects in the lunar event system, how they relate by M/R (light green) and how they relate by M/(R^2) (dark green) and also the derived equation of fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance (black line of equation with formula and arrow, also less prominent parallel lines of equivalence. I will return at end of this discussion to explain more about "parallel lines of equivalence."

On the graphs then, the mass and distance are log scale, with Jupiter at 0 (10^0 = 1).

Jupiter is the orange dot where the three lines for mass-distance functions converge. Saturn is the blue dot just to its lower right, and Uranus and Neptune (light and dark green) are a bit further down to the right. Well down below them is Pluto (grey).

Closer to the distance of the earth from the Sun on the graph (log R -0.2), you'll see several dots near the converging lines, representing Venus (yellow, the highest of that set), Mars (red), Mercury (brown), and also two asteroids, Ceres and Vesta (Ceres is the further and slightly more massive of the two). Well up the graph above this cluster is the Sun (at log mass 3.1).

Following up the M/R line the reader will find a yellow vertical line representing 1 A.U (log distance 4.3)., then a yellow dot for Alpha Centauri at 4.4 L.Y. (the Centauri group are not model factors being too far from the ecliptic, but this does show the comparison in gravitational energy of Jupiter and the nearest star, both in terms of the earth and the Sun (if this graph were heliocentric, most of the planets would be in slightly different positions on the graph but the stars and galaxy would not).

Next, a mauve dot shows Sirius, but its actual value in this system may be scaled down by a large angular separation factor from lunar orbit. Counter-balancing that, more massive but more distant stars in Orion would have an additive effect, but all of these together are probably a component of the last dot to be encountered (more about that after the rest of the stars).

Moving up the pattern, we find Regulus, Spica and Antares in that order. These are all double stars in fact, and for comparison, Spica has about 18 solar masses in its system at 260 light years. This equates to a log mass value of 4.3 and a distance factor of 6.7. Neither Regulus nor Antares achieve quite as high a ratio, meanwhile Aldebaran, the other component of the A event, would appear below Regulus on the graph and is only a fraction of Aldebaran's M/R value.

The final dot (square purple image) in the upper right of the graph is the mass of the galaxy at the distance of the galactic centre. Obviously this is an approximation of the actual mass-distance situation of all mass in that category; the "effective" location of this data point is probably higher by at least one order of magnitude in terms of mass or closer by one in terms of distance, and perhaps more, because the N Max event is observed to be about as intense as new or full moon.

The consequence of a scaled set of energy values whose equality is derived from the first equation and scale from an arbitrary scale function is that it raises up what might otherwise be expected to be weak events from lesser masses such as Mercury, Mars and in particular the asteroids which come into the lower end of the system as marginal players on this scaling. What causes the scaling? The only thing that fits is some concept of gravitational albedo from a root value of object radius. The cube root of radius of Ceres for example is about 0.8 Mars and 0.5 Venus, and even 0.2 Jupiter. This begins to approximate the measured scale of weather signals (from lunar conjunction timing) and also makes sense when you consider the scale of the Sun's radius in the system. Apparent radius further favours relatively close asteroids over massive outer planets by factors of 3 to 20. I continue to work on more precise equations and from those to try to gain an understanding of the complex physical process that must underlie the lunar interference patterns observed in the data (and by daily observation of weather events).

Another way of expressing the relation of parallel lines of equivalence is that they also increase over the kind of gradual scale that would suggest a further root value at play, such as intensity being a cube root of absolute value of the relation (fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance). So as an approximation, we could say that the lunar events are generated by a complex relationship of mass and distance that reduced to something like twelfth root of mass over fifteenth root of distance. I am currently testing out more exact values to see whether this holds, but for now I just have a series of scaled lines of equivalent values from the fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance.

The physical significance of fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance does not appear to derive very easily from any conventional associations of mass and distance, but I continue to search for a theoretical explanation and it's quite possible that a slightly different equation would be the result, however, this works empirically to bring equality to such events as VC, SC and SpC that have similar lunar event signatures in the data. Note one of the additional lines parallel to the equation line including Jupiter, shows this set to be closely related, and also, the Sun and galactic centre events are on another line. While that one would have an absolute value about 5 times the equation at Jupiter the further scaling would reduce that to cube root of five which is about 1.7 -- this seems about right from the data.

Any such relation of root values would generate a straight line on this logarithmic graph. The line for fifth root of mass over sixth root of distance would be just above the equation line chosen, while the line for cube root of mass over fourth root of distance would be just below (in other words, slope would be 3/4 whereas our equation has slope 4/5). The opposite would be true to the left of Jupiter's position.

However, I do consider this partly an unsolved mystery and wonder if it could perhaps be pointing to a partial solution of the complex physical poser known as gravitational waves (not to be confused with the meteorological phenomenon of gravity waves, although I suspect those are part of the lunar work in the background also).

post-4238-0-39936300-1358769734_thumb.jp

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

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

The above is rather sketchy and I may return to the planetary and then the stellar portions of the graphs to show in greater detail how these relate to the equation of choice (M / R^1.5). For now, let's just say that the lunar events are showing some hope of conformity to equations involving mass and distance, although even if we never found out exactly what those equations were, the empirical nature of the research has its own independent set of intensities established for the lunar events. It has been observed also that these intensities peak when the Moon makes a close approach to the other gravitational source (in angular terms) and that within each event, the intensity falls off roughly 10% per degree of separation, so that objects more than about 10 degrees from the Moon's path are not important sources in the model, even if they would otherwise fall close to the "Jupiter-Venus-Spica equality" line that is approximately the case from the graphs. Note also that Venus can be a lot further from earth than its position at inferior conjunction whereas Jupiter varies only 50% and Spica's distance is virtually invariable.

We will now return to the field sector study and the next stop on that tour is Saturn (all aboard).

Introduction to S-fields

Following the research on Jupiter, I looked for evidence of temperature variations in sync with the 378.1 day "S-year" or synodic period of Saturn. Let's take a closer look at Saturn's orbital variables as we did with Jupiter, using the diagram at the bottom of this post.

Saturn's distance from the Sun is 9.85 A.U. which is a little more than a light-hour from earth at our closest approach (making that distance 8.6 A.U.). If Saturn exploded or had a major visible event of any kind, it would be an hour and a half before we knew about it here on earth.

The diagram shows that perihelion (9.58 A.U.) for Saturn is near the N Max position around EOD 27 December. Saturn was last at that point in its orbit around the end of October 2003. Saturn takes about 29.43 years (very close to 206/7 yrs) to orbit the Sun, and Jupiter overtakes it every 19.86 years.

Earth requires an extra 12.8 days to catch up to slower-moving Saturn and that makes the separation between opposition dates 378.1 days on average, and in fact the separation is never much outside the range 377-379 days so I have calculated the temperature signals on the basis of a 378-day cycle with one leap day every 15 earth years.

The diagram shows the position of today's date (21 Jan) in a grey line that almost hits the date of ascending node, 17 January. From there, the planet rises for 7.4 years soon reaching the position where it happened to be in 1772 at start of daily CET data (red dots show yearly motion and opposition during that year). to its highest latitude of about 2.8 degrees in EOD April, where Saturn was last year actually. We will pass Saturn this 28th of April (blue dot). Then Saturn moves back down through the earth's orbital plane in EOD July at which point it is also at aphelon (10.12 A.U.) Saturn then moves down to a minimum celestial latitude of -2.8 degrees in EOD October.

On the diagram, I have included the derived average configuration of the S-fields. The system apparent in temperature data for Toronto has the same four-field-sector complexity as Jupiter but there appears to be a greater flex between S-2 and S-1 fields (remember that Jupiter has an almost linear J-2, but the S-2 is curved back about 30 degrees). This leads to quite a small separation between S-3 and S-2 warmings. In the next section I will post some graphs to show the signal derived from Toronto and from CET temperature data on that 378.1-day scale.

post-4238-0-98410800-1358737965_thumb.jp

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

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

S-field temperature signals

As it turns out, the S-field temperature signals are very close in strength to J-field signals. This is probably 3-4 times what one might expect Saturn to be able to do in any mass-distance relation however scaled against Jupiter, and I have recently worked out why this is so. Apparently, over whatever long period of time, many of the asteroids as well as Mars have been gradually accumulating fields of particles that were probably once better organized within the J-field sectors, in other words, these minor sources have inflated their signal strength as we will find out in subsequent sections of this report, and so the "J-field signal" is now dispersed to some extent. Possibly due to a greater distance and inclination, Saturn's signal has not been weakened as much although it must surely have been subject to some of the same degradation. Jupiter and Saturn also seem to interact rather vigorously over the 9.93 and 19.86 year periods of their alignments as evident from the periods of "regular, strong" solar activity. I have discussed that elsewhere on Net-weather in a separate thread.

Now, to compare the S-field warming signal to the J-field signal, the first necessity is to shift the data in the graphical presentation half a cycle to the right, since the first Saturn opposition is much earlier in the year 1772 than the first Jupiter opposition date (15 Feb vs 20 Aug). Also the S-year is 21 days shorter than the J-year. To achieve a similar scale for the graph, I have therefore taken the data in groups of 19 days with alternating 10,9 day panels (making a total of 40) and shifted the first of these 19 spaces to the right to occupy column 20 out of 40. I have also made the necessary shifts for the Toronto data which have a 20 June 1841 opposition date in their first cycle.

All data then are directly comparable as to signal vs orbital similarity, and place conjunction and opposition in the same orientation to the "year" of the signals.

Just a reminder, until further notice, our graphs are back to the "standard" size that has upper and lower limits of 1.0 C deg anomalies. This will apply to all graphs in this section on S-fields.

We start then with the dervied 378.1-day temperature signal for the S-year at Toronto (1841 to 2011 incl) and this is repeated in a second graph with the field segments identified. Once again, I note that the data are adjusted for presentation so that the Saturn opposition date is in data segment 24 (it would have been in segment 18 of the raw Toronto data). This is done so that we could compare S-year to J-year data, which we will do here after this first look at the data:

post-4238-0-89011500-1358740571_thumb.jppost-4238-0-53871000-1358740617_thumb.jp

The details are once again in the form of four warmings separated by cooler than average periods in the data. These are labelled S-2, S-1, S-4 and S-3 in order of encounter from 90 days before opposition, but the graph period then places S-3 as the first encountered.

The main details for Toronto are as follows:

** the amplitude is about 0.5 C deg

** the long duration of S-3 followed by S-2 warmings, with little interruption, forms a modulation of the S-year into warm and cooler halves despite other warmings for S-1 and S-4.

** the S-2 warming is unusually prominent

I could mention at this point that further research on J-fields and S-fields has shown a tendency for J-fields to be anticyclonic features sometimes known as "ring of fire" type warmings, and that S-fields are more like meridional blocks that are embedded in complex cyclonic rotation patterns. The reasons for this may be related to Jupiter and Saturn having opposite magnetic field orientations and imparting this partly through complex interactions between magnetopause, satellite rotation, and solar wind. This adds a further complication but opportunity for prediction in terms of understanding then predicting rotational effects in each set of fields.

Since all of this research was first based on Toronto data, I will compare the Toronto signals for Jupiter and Saturn first. Here they are, vertically stacked, with the field designators a good indication of which is which (the top one is Jupiter).

post-4238-0-58848300-1358740758_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-53871000-1358740617_thumb.jp

Clearly the two sets are different from each other and the greater flex of S-fields can be seen in the larger separation of S-2 and S-1 compared to J-2 and J-1. However, just for a sheer academic exercise that has no predictive application (that I can see today anyway), here is a graph of the average of J-year and S-year signals at Toronto normalized to same orbital year:

post-4238-0-30617300-1358742169_thumb.jp

What this does show us is that Toronto temperatures tend to be warmer when the two large planets are on the far side of the Sun from the earth. The gross difference is on the order of 0.2 C deg.

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

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

S-field signals in CET temperature data

With the same normalized opposition date in column 24 of the 40-segment data for a standard 378.1-day S-year, we can now examine the signal in CET data 1772-2011.

As with the J-field signals, when compared to Toronto we could see these as simultaneous but I have chosen to adopt the same quarter-cycle lag of about 90 days so that field warmings are shifted 90 days later in time. In that system, they seem to maintain the same relative intensity levels with S-2 (which now takes place while North America has the S-1 warming) the strongest signal. The overall amplitude is about 0.25 C deg, comparable if a bit smaller to the J-year signals.

Now, we went through the whole set of J-field segments (portions of orbital cycle) and will not go into the same detail for Saturn as I think the main point of that exercise for Jupiter was to show a relevance to actual weather data. In practical terms, all we are concerned about is to identify plausible signals and then have the means to sharpen the signals by taking only the most analogous cases. But I did want to show two of the segments of S-year data out of general interest (I have looked at all of them, and they tend to follow the Jupiter pattern of being warmer in the half-cycle that involves higher latitudes, half-cycle in this case meaning almost 15 years of data).

I have separated out two segments of interest here, first being the years closest to Saturn's perihelion in late December EOD. This segment has roughly 12% of the data and generally looks like an amplified version of the main signal (the segment is plotted against the main signal as with the J-field segments, but this time we don't double the scale, these are on the "standard scale" graphs). Note in this perihelion segment, there is quite a strong warming before the opposition. Note that SC events will not only be stronger than usual due to perihelion but also they will be superimposed on Northern Max events (within 2 days across the range of these years anyway). So that may account for a large portion of the additional warming -- the segment averages +0.9 C anomaly compared to all data.

post-4238-0-70223600-1358743889_thumb.jp

The second set of data relate to the current orbital position in EOD April and also take in 12% of the data (one may deduce from all this that I have eight segments set apart, and this is true although one is a lot longer than the others, about 16% and it rests between the two I am showing, by the way, it looks roughly similar to this one).

The "currrent S-year" segment begins to show greater variability than the perihelion set, and has an amplitude slightly larger than the graph. The data bar that runs off the top end just goes to +1.04 C deg but at the bottom the outlier reaches -1.25 C. Those are fairly large by S-field segment standards, so we are into a more variable S-field pattern than usual.

To help orient you to this segment, the yellow vertical line represents the position of 1 Jan 2013 and bear in mind all the data in this segment have similar time of year input so most of the years in the segment would have the winter data within 2-3 data groups of each other, etc. Note the warmer signals before New Years then after a mild first half of January a colder turn with the very cold (by segment standards) signal for February. This happens to come a bit later than the current cold spell which lined up well with the J-field segment, so my speculation is that a second part to this cold spell will follow, as this is not the only very cold signal in the "RJS model" index value set for the long-range forecast.

post-4238-0-82683200-1358743962_thumb.jp

Note also there's a long warm signal ahead in March and April. That was of course encountered mostly in March last year (which is also part of this same segment).

Perhaps when we're done with the general discussion of the theory and its many other components, we can look at some other segments of the S-fields. I figure that as we won't be using them for forecasts for 2-3 more years, there's no point in overloading on details at this point. Note again (as always) the operational forecasting is based on the current segment as derived from best analogues and a standard segment may not be quite the same thing as that best-fit which can always be customized to suit the analogue sets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Lunar events -- comparing planetary and stellar sources

I now have a clearer graph available for the "stellar" portion of the lunar event model as discussed a couple of days ago.

This is basically a portion of the graph shown, but with the mass and distance scale converted to something more familiar, namely solar masses and light years. This graph is logarithmic and the scale is shown but keep in mind that 3.2 equates to 0.5 in base 10 logarithms and 32 equates to about 15, 320 is about 25, etc. (32 squared is 1024 so the actual exact value of 0.5 is something closer to 3.17.

In that system, using log (base 10) values, the perihelion-opposition values for various planets convert to these points off the graph (well down to the lower left) ...

The data points are expressed in (x,y) as per the graph, and that makes x "R" or distance from earth (not Sun) and y "M" or mass. Distances are at closest earth approach and range considerably for Venus and Mars (about one unit of distance), substantially for Jupiter and Mercury, and less so for Uranus and Neptune

JUP (--4.3, --3.1) .. -1.2

SAT (--4.0, --3.7) .. -0.3

VEN (--5.7, --5.7) .... 0.0

URA (--3.5,--4.2) .. +0.7

NEP (--3.3,--4.2) .. +0.9

MARS (--5.2, --6.6) .. +1.4

MERC (--5.0, --7.0) ... +2.0

M/R (mass over distance) values will hit the stellar graph with similar values of log R - log M, and these are shown in italics above for Jupiter (J) and Saturn (S). To avoid cluttering the graph, other M/R lines are omitted. For J and S, the relevant "fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance" functions with slope -0.8 are shown as J' and S' on the graph. These will intersect with data points as shown above for J and S. J S and J' S' are pairs of parallel lines that do not intersect with each other although J would intersect at some point with S' and you can see that J' is about to cross S just to the left of the graph's range. The Sun would be at a point equivalent to (-4.7, 0.0) on this grid. The point (0,0) is the lower left corner of the graph in this discussion.

Also on the graph are data points for the stars in the model (S = Siriius, Al = Aldebaran, R = Regulus, Sp = Spica and An = Antares). The "effective points" adjusted because of angle between Moon and source would drop these data points down the graph in increments of about 0.1 log units per 2 deg, so Sirius would effectively be almost off the bottom of the graph (at its same distance or x value). Other sources shown stay in a closer range to the Moon's interfering path through the sky. According to Wikipedia, the actual values of distance and mass for each of these are:

Sirius (8.6 LY, 3.0 Sm) where LY means light years and Sm means solar masses of binary system

Aldebaran (65 LY, 1.7 Sm)

Regulus (77 LY, 4.6 Sm)

Spica (260 LY, 17.2 Sm)

Antares (550 LY, 22.4 Sm)

And also on the graph, you will find "fourth root of mass over fifth root of distance" equivalent lines for Uranus, Neptune, Venus, Mars and Mercury. The red line M' is for Mars, the brown line M'

is for Mercury.

This establishes where equivalence might be found between planetary and stellar events in the system. The compromise point used earlier for the galactic centre would be well off to the upper right of the graph around (4.5,10.0).

At some later point I will add a more detailed graph of the planetary portion of the graph.

post-4238-0-18438500-1358914776_thumb.jp

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

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

Good morning, the date being 24 Jan, today is the "N Max" lunar event with the relevant system crossing timing lines about 18z. Timing line three appears to be near its equilibrium position; timing line one is analyzed to be slightly west of equilibrium at about timing number 40. The discussion on Saturn was more or less finished but here's one final graph before we move on to the research results for Mars.

GRAPH below shows mean annual temperature anomaly for CET 1659-2012 on standard graph with range 1.0 to -1.0 C deg ... arranged by similar years of Saturn's orbit, 3-yr running mean to smooth data ... and the start year is data bar 12 to conform to an earlier similar graph for Jupiter.

.post-4238-0-08720600-1359027760_thumb.jp

This is an average of CET annual anomalies during the 29.43-year Saturn orbital cycle. In this theory, I talk about the "S-year" or various other planetary synodic years but those are periods between oppositions, not orbital cycles. Saturn takes 29.43 earth years to make the same circle, albeit 10 times further from the Sun. The trends here are similar to Jupiter in some ways, by the way, the data are presented so that the graph can be directly compared to the Jupiter 12-year temperature cycle presented earlier. The data set is 1659 to 2012 inclusive which happens to be 12 times 29.5 years, so Saturn has just completed twelve of its own years in that time. Since we showed the Jupiter time series from the 2012 position as a starting point (EOD 1 Nov) the same starting point for Saturn requires that we place 1659 (and 2013 has the same position) in year 12 of the graph, and the + symbol marks the position of 2012 when Saturn reached its highest inclination. The -- symbol marks the year of lowest orbital latitude. That occurs just before the end of the cycle. This signal is not particularly strong nor is it that similar to Jupiter's signal since there are two warmings evident, one around highest latitude values, and another around lowest latitude values. This may tell us that inclination between 1.5 and 3.0 deg form a critical angle for enhancing some component of the subtropical highs with possibly a reflexive property from one hemisphere to the other. There would need to be quite a few other signals like this one for there to be much application to long-range forecasting, but it is interesting to see this pattern and I intend to show all comparable results including one or two weak signals along the way. The colder period mid-graph falls about 2-5 years after Saturn has dipped below our orbital plane and it includes the winter of 1962-63 and the notable cold spell of 1785-86. Possibly what this graph actually means is that one orbital position of Saturn disturbs other field warming potential in the entire system and that this colder interval is the only real result, the "warm" portions of this cycle may just be normal background without this approximately 30-year Saturn-based interruption of the system. It is in any case something bookmarked for further study but we won't enter that cold period again until 2021 to 2025 approximately.

Introduction to Mars field sector study

As we have been looking at the two largest outer planets, it might have made sense to look briefly at the research findings for Uranus and Neptune. I can end the suspense there by saying there are weaker field sectors indicated by the research, and I will report on that towards the end of the thread. However, the signals are on the order of 0.1 to 0.2 C deg and not all that strong or therefore interesting except as an extension of this theory. Perhaps we will find this more interesting than I expect, but in the meantime, there are other substantial "players" in the field sector model and this discussion will now move on to show evidence that Mars is just about the equal of Jupiter in terms of creating temperature signals. This surprised me in the 1990s when I turned my attention to Mars and other planets to compare their signals to what I had then uncovered for Jupiter and Saturn. However, it tends to fit the general theme of the developing lunar model's highly conservative mass-distance scaling wherein Mars scores a fairly soild 40% of Jupiter's value and a slightly higher value than Saturn. There is also the factor already mentioned that I suspect Mars and some of the asteroids have been accumulating particles that were at some point in J-field sectors over a long period of time and carrying these around as enhancers of weak field sector producing potential. So part of what we see here may be a transfer from the J-fields -- whatever the exact reasoning, as an empirical model all we really need to do here is establish what the signal associated with Mars happens to be, and if we can understand it, so much the better (same applies to gravitation, not everyone who refuses to step out of a moving airplane could tell you exactly why that was).

So as we have done earlier, let's review the orbit of Mars which makes this part of the model both challenging and potentially very important in long-range forecasting. I could begin by saying that Mars orbits the Sun at about 1.52 A.U. with an eccentricity twice that of Jupiter or Saturn (.093) and thus its orbit is notably elliptical. The orbit takes 1.88 years or about 687 earth days. Although not relevant to our study, Mars has about one-tenth of the earth's mass, a density of about 3 and has a day just 37 minutes longer than our own (as a smaller body, Mars is not spinning anywhere near as fast as the earth). Mars has two very small moons that are likely captured asteroids. The earth's orbit (the inner loop) and the current vector to Jupiter (EOD Dec 7) are shown also.

The perihelion (as shown in the diagram below) is around EOD August 24th, similar to Jupiter although an EOD-month earlier (it takes Mars about 45 days to cover that EOD-month on the fast side of its orbit). Notice that the perihelion (1.38 A.U.) comes shortly after the lowest latitude in the orbital cycle, when Mars is at an inclination of --1.85 deg. Mars rises through "ascending node" around EOD 10 November, which is similar to Mercury and about an eighth of an orbital cycle before either Jupiter or Saturn do so. By EOD February, Mars is moving a lot slower and just about half the speed of the earth, so it takes two earth months to complete an EOD month on this side of the orbit. Aphelion sees Mars at 1.66 A.U. in late February EOD, just after its highest latitude of +1.85 deg. From there, Mars moves a bit faster and begins to fall back towards our orbital plane which it crosses around EOD 12 May.

post-4238-0-70215700-1359027610_thumb.jp

I have drawn onto the diagram the 2012 opposition date of March 3rd (3-3-2012) as well as two dates relevant to the data, the position of Mars on 1-1-1772, in EOD June, and the first opposition in the daily data period, 20 Jan 1773 (1-20-1773). As there will be a graph of annual mean temperatures similar to that just shown for Saturn, note also that the 1-1-1659 position was essentially about a month earlier than the 1772 position. I will mention this again in the context of the graph which is somewhat interesting as it shows a background "16-year" cycle but that cycle is really a composite of 15 and 17 year periods between similar Mars oppositions.

Now that we've looked at the basic orbital variables, let's get a handle on the pattern of Mars oppositions and the nature of the much longer Mars synodic year or Ma-year as I call it. Everything in this model concerned with Mars takes the extra letter so that we can distinguish from Mercury although at this point I have not convinced myself that Mercury has a four-sector structure for its fields and so we could have said M-1 to M-4 but instead we're going to use Ma-1 to Ma-4 for the four Mars-field sectors.

The pattern of Mars oppositions is complex and avoids any neat cycles although there are some not so neat (and tidy) ones.

Basically, the closest opposition dates come in the sequence 0,15,32,47,62 and 79 years. This repeats for a number of times before it is necessary to jog slightly to keep a sequence in the same range of dates. Also, we tend to see oppositions with Mars every second year and about a month later in the year, except for near-perihelion cases and then Mars is speeding along so it takes more like 2-3 extra months to catch up and the opposition dates can skip several months ahead. Conjunctions tend to move the opposite way against time, so the time separations in Mars "segments" get rather complex and only the very closest date analogues will preserve timing without careful adjustments of 10-20 days being necessary. While that doesn't sound like much I am learning that you can make better and more precise long range forecasts if you can line up some of these movable components very precisely from similar but not exactly similar analogues.

Anyway, the fact is that Mars will go through cycles of either seven or eight oppositions that generally fall into a pattern like this for opposition dates (this is in fact the first seven in the series): 20 Jan, 23 Feb, 30 Mar, 12 May, 12 Jul, 1 Oct, 27 Nov (these were opposition dates from 1773 to 1785) then back to 7 Jan (1788) and another series that produced a series of dates reproduced below, but then gave us an extra date of 25 Dec in 1802 before returning to a sequence basically 32 years and 8 days later than the first one. That comparison reveals how the time sequence rapidly varies due to orbital speed:

1773-85 .. 1788-1802

20 Jan .. 7 Jan

23 Feb .. 10 Feb

30 Mar .. 16 Mar

12 May .. 24 Apr

12 Jul .. 15 Jun

01 Oct .. 31 Aug

27 Nov .. 9 Nov

-- -- -- ... 25 Dec

Notice how the difference increases near the perihelion date oppositions. But in most cases, after 32 years the dates are about 8-10 days later, after 47 years about 4 days earlier, and therefore after 79 years about 3 days later than previous cases. A more exact similarity occurs every 205 years (note that is 79 x 2 +47, so any longer term study than the CET period would require that sort of modulation of data). Notice also there will be two consecutive years between cycles without a Mars opposition, and in those, a November conjunction can be expected in the first of the two.

Over the 240 years of our daily data study, there were 15 full cycles that average 15.8 years, and seven of these had the extra year so it is weighted one-half when building an overall profile from eight segments. We are now into a 16th set of "Mars years" (these are 766-811 days long as explained) -- the opposition dates passed so far in the current cycle are 29 Jan 2010 and 3 March 2012. Before that we had one of the "partial segment" group with the 24 Dec 2007 opposition. The "partials" have opposition dates that are always in the second half of December

An important detail for understanding Mars segments in general is to keep in mind that we are looking at 2.1-2.3 year periods in which the first year of the data starts with a Mars conjunction (or in some cases just follows one) and the second year of the data has a Mars opposition. Whatever we might conclude about similar segments, the results apply to periods twice as long as J-field or S-field segments. The number of segments has been set at eight but you could get better precision by taking fifteen using the "partial" and roughly equal halves of the other seven segments. This would begin to resolve the data in the faster-moving perihelion cases into narrower ranges, that is already the case for the slower-moving aphelion cases which tend to overlap one calendar month and perhaps a few extra days.

Another way of combining the data into segments would be to move some of the partial set to either side and have two segments with extra data. I have found the Mars segments quite conservative of features and they tend to move gradually through various trends that I will discuss after looking at the overall profile of the Mars synodic year.

That year is on average 780 days long. The eight segments outlined above (with their first two members identified, the rest can be deduced from the constant progression 0,15,32,47,62,79 etc) have average lengths that vary with the opposition dates, if the objective is to fix the opposition date at the first case of day 386. Those eight segment lengths turned out to be 766, 766, 773, 792, 811, 791, 774 and 766 days. That leaves the conjunctions in a range from about 45 days before the end of segments (some of the middle segments) to 45 days into the segments (the shorter ones). That problem is eliminated when you use only date-adjusted "custom" segments for forecasting (in other words, take the very similar cases and adjust those that are less similar by dropping days as required to keep field sectors sharply aligned in the data).

We have not done that final step in the segments to be viewed here and yet they are quite impressive compared to most of the signals we have examined. In the next post I will outline some of the graphs of the Mars field sector temperature signals. But first, here is the raw data for Toronto over the period 1841-2011, adjusted to place the opposition where we will have the CET data aligned, and equal to the Jupiter alignment and Saturn adjusted data. For Toronto, the first Mars opposition was 18 April 1841 so this requires that the data be shifted well to the right on the graph. The CET data only needs to be shifted 3 data groups out of 30, the Toronto data is shifted 12 (in other words, the graph shows you the Toronto signal as derived but the starting point is data bar 13). These data are 26-day averages over the entire data set. This produces a 30-member graph which is somewhat less refined than the 40-member graphs for Jupiter and Saturn but these Mars field signals are broad and they look very similar in presentation on any reasonable time frame. Some of the daily values are 2-3 times the 26-day values but there tend to be some very climatic-looking signals with regular ups and downs much like actual weather data, and warm or cold spells of approximately 2-4 month duration. Mars field sectors have the look of significant atmospheric ridges and troughs moving rather slowly (the assumption is progressive motion that becomes almost q.s. when Mars accelerates and its field structure begins to keep pace more with the faster earth in its orbit).

Realize that the developing theory implies that J-field signals will rotate around the hemisphere at a pace of 1 rotation every 399 days, Saturn once every 378 days.That is about a degree of longitude a day. A J-field feature over eastern North America today should be somewhere near western Europe in 70-80 days. A similar Mars-field sector feature would require twice as long and is moving half as fast -- even slower when Mars is near perihelion (as it is now). Mars field weather events might be moving (progressively) as slowly as 20 knots or less. This leads to long duration input of warming or cooling signals, so even if the signal strength is not as great as for Jupiter or even Saturn, the cumulative effects of anchoring the jet stream by constant input of a small anomaly may be more significant. Also, this is a finding to be elaborated upon near the end of the whole report, Mars fields have no sources of internal rotation or complexity (identified in any case). This makes them areas of bland weather that favour stable high pressure, inversions, and lack of frontal contrast. Superimposed on some other major field sector warming, one suspects that a Mars-field sector can anchor a very significant anomaly pattern.

post-4238-0-80930300-1359027976_thumb.jp

This graph for the Toronto temperatures (on our standard 1.0 C deg amplitude graph, 30 equal time intervals of 26 days) has two major details. First, the (approximately) year closer to conjunction with the Ma-4 and Ma-3 warmings is a generally warmer time than the year with the opposition and the Ma-2 and Ma-1 signals. The Ma-4 and Ma-3 signals are longer and stronger than Ma-2 and Ma-1. Those last two tend to be strongest in Toronto data when Mars is near perihelion so there is a complex cycle of years with warmings, colder years, and 3-4 consecutive warm years, depending on dates of oppositions. Since perihelion is in late summer and fields are curved (see the diagram above in this post for a schematic of how the Mars field sectors appear), the years that benefit from strongest Mars field warmings (referring to Toronto) tend to have long hot summers followed by long, warm autumns. The years in between them tend to have the strongest winter conjunction warmings. This leads to a fairly noticeable long-term signal of about four unusually warm years every 15.8 years (the mean period of the complex Mars cycle). That tendency for the Toronto data may not be transferred downstream and the CET data show much different characteristics. This may be part of some oscillation of the Atlantic basin climate, and so Mars becomes a bit more interesting than we might have expected.

Edited by Roger J Smith
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

The Mars field sector profiles in CET data

Now we can compare the Toronto data with the field sectors shown (I will repeat that graph) with the same analysis of CET daily data in 26-day groups. It was only necessary to shift the data three spaces to the right to line up the Mars opposition (day 386 out of 780) with the Jupiter opposition (recall that was day 233 out of 399). Using the same standard graph (1.0 C deg amplitude) we can now directly compare the Toronto and CET data and see that a good fit is obtained by making the same assumption about lag time for downstream propagation of the field warmings. Once again, I should stress this point, it remains unresolved whether that downstream propagation is the actual mechanism in play or the only component, I suspect reality is a composite of direct field warmings simultaneously at perhaps four "favoured" timing sectors (1,3,6,8 are my investigative choices) and a strong downstream transfer component. I believe that because of the similar intensity factors that you often find when comparing lagged as opposed to simultaneous data.

post-4238-0-38522300-1359033600_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-68746900-1359033747_thumb.jp

Now, looking at the CET Mars-field sector analysis, the main point to be made in comparison to Toronto is that the prominence of the Ma-4 and Ma-3 warmings can only be preserved with an assumption of lag. Since Mars field sectors move at half the speed (approximately) of J-field sectors, that lag is substantial, as one-quarter of 780 days (or 2/9 to account for timing structure) is in the vicinity of half a year. Translation, it would take about six months for some major Mars-field warming to arrive in the UK from eastern North America, and that's assuming prograde motion.

Just an aside, I mentioned that J-field features are "ring of fire" active warm patterns with second-order rotational features. Mars-field warmings are probably those flat and inactive warmish ridges that tend to plod along and occasionally swell up, occasionally almost disappear from view (that may be because Mars field sectors can be eclipsed or disrupted by more powerful J-field or various retrograde elements).

The overall profile of the Mars "year" of 780 days is not a huge signal in and of itself, but we don't use these overall profiles in forecasting, and the segments are much stronger.

Mars-field segments in CET data

Recall that a "segment" is defined to be any cohesive sub-set of data organized by similar orbital characteristics. The first point to be made is a very fundamental one to this theory -- Mars has two essential modes and this seems to apply to both the Toronto data and the CET data. During its time above the ecliptic from about EOD November to April, the Mars years are somewhat shorter averaging 770 days, and the Toronto data are generally colder but especially the Ma-2 and Ma-1 field sectors are weaker at providing significant warming. From observation, I've come to think of them as being too far north to be totally effective at warming eastern North America, often they might be more effective at warming the subarctic in that region. When they translate east and get over Europe, they seem to be better positioned to hold warmth in place. So it may not be any dynamic change in them that is being observed so much as a meteorological application. The first principle of this theory is that many effects are localized into a grid and do not hit all places equally like for example an increase in solar radiation might do. Even there, different climate zones would respond differentially. My theory is that the system is localized by our differential magnetic field, which acts like a receiver for complex signals and projects them according to understandable rules such as signal ahead of earth, projection east of timing line one, signal behind earth in our orbit, signal projected west. Latitudinal projection would follow a simpler logic. High signals would fall into the polar regions. Signals rising in time would perhaps sweep up and over the north polar region (and that should put you in mind of the strat-warm phenomenon).

So looking at some segment data for the Mars fields, I have organized the CET segments into two major groupings, which are both on the following graph together. The standard red and blue colour bars represent the "aphelion" set of data from the first three segments and the partial for late December oppositions. So that basically spans the period 15 Dec to about 30 April. About half the cases are in that time span despite that not being quite half a year. The other set, colour coded by light blue and orange colour bars, will show the perihelion set of Mars field sector analysis. Let's compare and contrast (the colour dots refer to some extremes in two segments, will explain that later) ...

First point, the scale on this graph is double so the range here is from +2.0 to -2.0 C deg. That's because some of the data in the segments get into the 1-2 C range for these 26-day periods. Yes, this is a big deal because we're talking about a natural signal that can account for 1-2 C anomalies on a monthly time scale. In fact some of the daily values that go into these data averages reach 3 or even 4 C degrees. Considering this is postulated to be no more than a 15-20 per cent of variance factor in the model, I am very happy with these Mars-field segments. The Toronto data also produce some very large anomalies and the very least I could say is that Mars field segments match if not exceed the value of J-field segments. As already mentioned, that could be because Mars is "stealing" some of the J-field structure slowly over time. Without Jupiter there, perhaps a solar system with just ourselves and Mars would be a rather anemic system. But whatever the explanation, the fact is that Mars segments are quite robust. Looking at this graph, we are basically just looking at the two halves of data for Mars above and below the ecliptic. It is fairly obvious that the "above" or aphelon (red-dark blue) set are generally warmer and this is measurable in my data sets -- the average anomaly is +0.42 C compared to --0.42 C when Mars is in perihelion opposition mode. Remember, these are averages over long periods when Mars could be at any point in its orbit at random, but the timing of close approach seems to make the difference.

The warmer half of the data would stand out even more, were it not for the cold spell in one segment (the second one with February to early March opposition dates). That one starts out with some notable cold around the conjunction dates a year ahead of the stated oppositions. The blue and red dots on the graph represent that segment at various times when it goes to extreme values. None of the other segments in that half show these extremes and they tend to stay quite close to the overall averages. So with that 2-3 month interval of cold weather excluded, the rest of this subset is even warmer, at about +0.5 C. And the same segment (2) then produces even warmer months (well 26-day averages) of data around the February to early March opposition dates of their second years. You'll find six red dots well above the average data except for one that is embedded near the top of the average bar. That equates to almost 4.5 months of a warm signal from this component to be expected over a period analogous to Feb-June 2012 (or 1995, 1980 etc) This can be overcome, a signal of about +1.0 C is still not so massive that it will guarantee a warm spell, but it's one of the largest segment signals in the model at present.

post-4238-0-34104500-1359033677_thumb.jp

On the other hand, the perihelion-opposition group (orange-blue) also has its own extreme segment which is the fifth one that actually spans perihelion itself and has a wide range of opposition dates from late August to mid-October. The outliers in that segment are shown in dark brown (warm) dots and light blue with black core dots for cold. The logic here is considerably different. First of all, this whole subset (half the data basically) fail to provide the same warm signal around Mars opposition that I believe to be from upstream Ma-4/3 warmings generated many months previously over North America. More research is needed to determine whether these signals, which are present in strength in the Toronto data, go elsewhere on their journey or perhaps are diluted. But the absolute extreme case is clearly a total missing case for these warmings and it remains a good half degree colder than the average even for that part of the data let alone the much warmer other half. (reference to the five light blue dots on the graph near the opposition vertical at mid-range). Conversely, this segment finds additional warmth during the arrival of (presumably) Ma-1 field warmings from upstream and those are represented by a cluster of brown dots above the general run of data earlier in the Mars year.

These differences look quite sharp on a daily scale graph too, and the various features of this segment analysis can be followed along from segment to segment with some of the variations due to the shifting dates of conjunction that occur because of our convention to keep the opposition dates fixed at day 386 of the time series (in practice, these are fixed completely in custom data sets but in these approximations each segment can produce a narrow range of 5-10 days). The conjunction dates tend to wander around in that rather large space between the two light green vertical lines in the left portion of the graph and a few outliers actually hit the end of the data series. Basically, the latest conjunction dates (in the time series or Mars-year) will occur before oppositions that are in July-August, and the earliest will come before oppositions around January 15th. Some of the extreme cases will be at the end of the previous segment. I am noting this in case anyone takes up any of this research, you will need to reorient the conjunction half of the Mars year or employ a moving time filter of some kind to produce sharper profiles.

Otherwise, the main comment I could make is that the eight Mars segments all show some daily scale variations that provide as much as 2-3 C anomaly signal, something often likely to anchor a seasonal forecast to some extent. However, I am at a rather early stage of verification with all of this as much of it has just been developed in the past year. And there are other signals of nearly equal strength being uncovered in the same part of the solar system, apparently it is not just Mars that is stealing from Jupiter. The plot thickens.

In a future post, I will show the Mars annual cycle over the 15.8 year time scale, and then move on to discuss some much different factors, retrograde signals. That will probably happen after a pause because of the volume of new reading and the weekend approaching. I will probably just post the Mars 15.8-year graph and call it a day.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Indirect signals of Mars in CET temperature data

What we have examined so far is the synodic Mars year of 780 days but in fact there is also a sidereal period for Mars of 686.94 days, unrelated to earth's position in the solar system, and that leaves an imprint in the CET data. The following graph shows the average temperature anomaly in 23-day periods dropping one day from 10th, 20th and 30th intervals (because the data start with 1-1-1772), this graph traces the sidereal year from EOD 15 June or about when Mars is beginning to speed up and drop below our orbital plane, so the second half of the graph period shows the interval of higher latitude and slower forward speed. The orbital data are shown schematically by black dots that also increase in size to represent perihelion (just after the lowest point in the orbit). The only major departure from a 1:1 correspondence between inclination and CET temperature is a strong flare-up of temperatures after descending node (end of the time series). This is even more apparent in a daily scale graph showing quite a strong peak around +0.8 C deg on days 662-664 of the time series (near end of second last bar in graph). At that point, Mars is passing Antares and has been crossing the earth's orbital plane, so those are factors that might explain this temperature spike, which has been very prominent in the most recent third of the data. Note that earth's position is not relevant to this signal, however, it is not used yet in long-range forecasting because it is assumed that the data in this profile will emerge from the segment analysis.

post-4238-0-58612500-1359040745_thumb.jp

This is however an indication (proof might be too strong a word) of a temperature oscillation in at least one data set on earth related to the sidereal orbital cycle of Mars, with amplitude 0.25 C deg. Extreme daily values are close to plus or minus 0.8 C deg over about 130 cycles.

Now we turn to an examination of the "approximately 16 year cycle" or more precisely the 15.8 year cycle that might be obtainable from annual mean temperatures over the 22 full cycles with six years into a 23rd cycle of CET (1659-2012) related to the various years of earth-Mars orbital interaction through whatever processes including the ones discussed earlier (field sectors, sidereal motion). That gives us results shown in the graph here:

In this graph, the overall 354-year data base is used to generate the averages starting in 1659 and taking groups of 15,17,15,15,17 years throughout the data. This complex cycle starts about one segment earlier than the daily CET period with a December opposition in 1659 as opposed to the next-January opposition that applies to 1772 (opp in 1773).

post-4238-0-72364600-1359040816_thumb.jp

The reader who wants to view this graph directly comparable to the daily period should take a starting point in year 3 and view the first two data bars as the occasional add-ons needed to keep the 15-year cycle in sync with the longer average of 15.8 years. Doing a 16-year average of this data would be pointless for obvious reasons, the years would not match up for earth-Mars relative position. In the manner used, the years do line up within about 15 days in all cases for significant dates.

The red-dark blue data bars show the basic data for the entire period. I checked 1772-2012 and the data are similar although they average 0.1 C higher with a few minor variations. A different pattern emerges towards the 20th century; the orange and light blue bars higher on the graph indicate averages for the past 101 years (1912 to 2012 -- chosen because a series began in 1912) and the +0.5 C line is used as the "normal" determinant although the average of this data is probably closer to +0.4 C. These two complex cycles of 15.8 years (effectively) show a tendency towards a biennial oscillation similar to the QBO with a period longer than 2.0 years (also similar to the QBO) and it's my belief that Earth-Mars and Mars-Jupiter interactions may actually cause the QBO signal in terrestrial weather, or at least a part thereof.

Having mentioned Mars-Jupiter, I will try to produce some graphical evidence of a cycle in CET temperature on that time scale, Mars passes Jupiter about once every 2.23 years with a slightly irregular periodicity due to elliptical orbits, and there are sets that occur close to earth oppositions, for example, in Feb 1790 the three planets were virtually aligned. These return to similar dates every 47 years but the series drift off and reset with one 49 year interval every six or seven times. Meanwhile in 47 years there would be 21 of these cycles.

It will take me several days to produce a data set but I am going to investigate the CET signal for this Mars-Jupiter cycle to see if it's worth further work. The signal, if any, would be due to interference by Mars in the J-field structure or vice versa. But I have no preconceived idea what this signal investigation might show, not being very au courant with QBO theory (I recall something about biennial annual temperature oscillations, period variability that reminds me of Mars year variability, and wind direction changes in the subtropics).

Should be an interesting report on that, who knows, maybe there's a huge signal and the marathon could be over soon.

Enjoy the thaw while it lasts (8-10 days?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lincolnshire - 15m asl
  • Weather Preferences: Frost and snow. A quiet autumn day is also good.
  • Location: Lincolnshire - 15m asl

Enjoy the thaw while it lasts (8-10 days?).

Ha - hope you are right. :-)

Thusfar I am really struggling to stay with the concepts here, but I will reread and reread and see if I can catch up your decades of personal slog.

Thanks Roger - keep it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Thanks, I believe that there is a very simple "underlying concept" that anyone reading this can use, which is, every piece of this research is designed to add one small part of overall variability to a working model, and any similarities between cycles is shown mainly to illustrate the possible validity of the theory. I have been encouraged to test out these challenging concepts by such factors as similarity between signals (showing a process) and continuity of signals from one period to another (or with certain expected variations, from segment to segment of data). It is really a strong point in favour of a signal if it maintains its identity from first half of data to second half, or within three equal thirds, etc. Will be posting a bit more by Monday perhaps, busy this weekend getting our computer memory upgraded (not at my home base typing this). Had a quick look at the Mars-Jupiter signal in the data, it is fairly small but I have not had time to check segments of that data for anything significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

If you're wondering why no posts for 3 days or so, we have just been upgrading our home computer memory (this thread explains why, I suppose) and that has not gone as smoothly as planned, but on the second attempt our service guy seems to have succeeded (touch wood) and so, once I find everything in the backed-up document folders, I can resume probably with a quick look at signals from Uranus and Neptune to finish off the outer planet section, then on to what may be the most interesting single part of this to any snow-ramping type of reader, the retrograde index components of this model, and then on to a final section that I have been hinting about, the asteroid signal-stealers. I have the evidence and the police have been notified.

The retrograde index will make a great topic for February because the research shows that it peaks in mid to late February of this winter season and this is the foundation of my LRF call for a cold February. We may be able to track this retrogression quite closely as it develops. I have been monitoring it daily and consider that it is still in a very early formative stage (the discussion here in a few days' time will get into how retrogression can be tracked and quantified). One key element in favour of retrogression is that a large blocking high north of the Bering Strait that reached almost 1060 mbs a week ago has now basically split into two equal remnants and boosted the general presence of Siberian arctic air over a wide region so that it's in place to move in sync with any trans-polar push of higher pressures coming out of the north as seen from Europe but actually from well to the east and over the pole.

On today's charts I notice some encouraging signs of low pressure filling in over north-central Russia and an easterly flow setting up across the 65-75 N coastal regions. So anyway, retrogression -- can't have major winter in the UK without at least some of that.

So the plan is to post charts for signals on just the annual (U-year, N-year) scale for Uranus and Neptune -- these could be fairly large signals that need to be factored into the model, but I got almost the same result for several recent forecasts whether they were in or out of the mix. However, I wanted to cover all bases here and give a foundation for a graph that I will show at the end of play, comparing all major signal sources and their intensities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Analysis of Field sectors in temperature data for outer planets Uranus and Neptune

As stated already, this section is to establish the signal strength of the two large outermost planets in the solar system, Uranus and Neptune. These signals are similar to those provided by analysis of the Saturn or S-field structure, but as one might expect, weaker. The data have been studied for segment analysis but there is little of interest there, segments do not vary much from the larger sample of all data. The Neptune data are probably not sufficiently independent given that the orbital period of Neptune is about twice that of Uranus and so a separation of these signals after just two "N-year" intervals in the full CET period is problematic.

The diagram below shows the orbital parameters for Uranus. Like the other planets we have been investigating, the orbit is generally below our orbital plane on the "autumn-EOD" side of the solar system and above on the "spring-EOD" side. However, Uranus is closest of all the planets to matching our orbital plane with an inclination of only 0.77 deg. Uranus is about twice as far from the Sun as Saturn on average and requires 84.01 years to complete its orbit at a mean distance of 19,.3 A.U.

post-4238-0-05883700-1359601787_thumb.jp

The ascending node is in EOD December and perihelion is around EOD 9 March. That last occurred in 1966, while the most recent aphelion was in 2009. The eccentricity of orbit (.05) is about the same as Saturn and just slightly larger than Jupiter's. The diagram shows where Uranus was located (EOD 9 Nov) at the start of daily data in 1772, and where it is this year, with conjunction timed for 29 March and opposition on 3 October.

The graph also shows the current positions of Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune.

The synodic period ("U-year") is 369.66 days which means that Uranus moves forward a mere four days in the EOD year each time we overtake the awkwardly-named seventh planet (I have often wished they had changed the name to Herschel but whatever). The diagram also sketches out the general form of the U-field structure, not to say that these field sectors are very large or powerful, but there is an imprint on both CET and Toronto data and the logic seems to follow that already established with four field sector warmings and a lag observable from the Toronto data to the CET.

The following two graphs illustrate the derived 40-interval signature of the U-year for comparison with the other signals. These are on the usual 1.0-deg grid and the data have been adjusted to place the orbital opposition and conjunction in the usual places on the graphs. This required that the CET data would start in position 29 out of 40, and that the Toronto data (1841-2011) would begin in position 4. Both of these adjustments place the opposition as shown in position 24.

To achieve a 40-interval analysis, the data are arranged in groups of 10,9,9,9 days repeated over ten cycles for a 370-day total cycle.

The signals are on the order of two-thirds as strong as Saturn's with maximum (10-day) average anomaly of about 0.3 C deg. Although this is bordering on quasi-random, the pattern does look similar to other stronger signals with the four peaks as analyzed in the graphs. I have inspected the segments and they generally don't vary a lot from the mean of all data. The daily data at Toronto have some very strong spikes here and there that get smoothed out in the 10-day filters, and I suspect these are harmonics from some entirely different signal.

post-4238-0-79085700-1359601838_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-04778000-1359602334_thumb.jp

It appears that the U-year has a subtle oscillation if you accept the lag concept, as the Toronto data show that the U-4 to U-3 interval is warmer by about 0.2 C deg than the U-2 to U-1 interval, and the reverse is true for the CET data. The lag is also slightly longer in percentage terms for reasons not yet understood. The difference is not a large one, about 10% (in other words, if the concept of downstream dissipation is valid, the U-fields are taking about a month longer, factoring in the shorter length of the U-year, to reach timing line three. This argues in favour of some constant rate of dissipation unrelated to synodic year length).

Data for Neptune will be posted in a separate post later. .

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

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

Now we have a look at the data for Neptune, which orbits the Sun at 30.0 A.U. taking 165 earth years, and has the least eccentric orbit of any planet (similar to Venus, more circular in orbit than the rest at e = .005).

As with all other planets (and many asteroids) the inclination is highest in EOD spring although Neptune's ascending node is later than the rest at EOD 2 Feb (the grey line on the diagram below indicates today's date 31 Jan as well as 2 Aug) and the descending node is EOD 4 Aug. This places Neptune as high as +1.77 deg above the ecliptic in EOD May (last reached in 1961) and -1.77 deg below the ecliptic around EOD 4 Nov last reached in the late 1870s.

The diagram shows the 1772 position for the start of CET daily data (EOD 4 March) and the current position of EOD 26 August en route to an opposition 27 August. The synodic year is 367.5 days which means that opposition dates are generally 2 days later each succeeding year (but could be one day later in leap years). Neptune makes one orbit every 1.97 Uranus orbits.

post-4238-0-56630800-1359668431_thumb.jp

With its very nearly circular orbit, "perihelion" is not a very precise location given the second-order perturbations in all planetary orbits. Jean Meeus reports that Neptune had three quasi-perihelion events in EOD Nov-Dec around the 1880s and three quasi-aphelion events in EOD May-June around the 1960s. Differences in orbital distance were incremental at most.

The temperature analysis for Toronto requires that we shift the data just one space to the right as the 1841 opposition date in August placed the data almost in line with the Jupiter CET standard used for all these graphs (data bar 24 out of 40 for opposition). The Neptune synodic or N-year requires that the data be arranged in six groups of 10,9,9,9,9,9 days then 10,9,9,9.5 at the end of the series. The CET data are almost a half-cycle out from the Jupiter template and thus need to start at position 17.

I've mentioned this with each study and just hope it won't lead to confusion if any other researchers look at the data -- once again, all these planetary-year signals are "normalized" to a position that places opposition in data group 24 out of 40. This allows us to compare signals directly, the arbitrary starting date of 1-1-1772 for all signals would render them difficult to compare directly,

Anyway, to return to the actual data for the N-year, the Toronto signals are actually stronger for Neptune than for Uranus; however, it should be noted that Neptune was aligned with Uranus from about 1980 to 2000 during a rather warm interval, and I consider that the N-year signal could be partially a repeat of the U-year signal, so the actual strength may be more comparable. Also, there is evidence of a lag that I had suspected on a much smaller time scale for other field sectors, as shown in the orbit diagram, the field sectors associated with Neptune may have a forward drift in space in some kind of Coriolis effect possibly, over a 3-10 year interval of unknown duration. Since the planet would have been slightly behind its current position this lag is greater than its cumulative appearance. But this is not a huge detail, the field sectors are basically encountered later in time relative to opposition and conjunction than for other groups, by a factor of about 5-10 per cent of orbit.

The field warmings at Toronto are fairly significant (whether all can be attributed directly to the N-field system is not yet established). Some daily data exceed 1.5 C deg and as shown some of the 9 to 10 day intervals exceed 0.5 C deg. There are hints that this field structure may push well north of the jet stream because of large cold signals between field sectors. At one point in time I had a concept of the planetary fields as stacked by latitude then oscillating due to orbital inclination. Now I see this more as a complex system of oscillation north-south based on individual orbital inclination changes. (in other words, I picture that all field sectors follow the path of the subtropical jet and use 45 deg meteo-latitude which is determined from the timing grid and equates to 38 deg in N America, 45 in western Europe, 53 in central Asia and back to about 45 in eastern Asia to 47 mid-Pacific and about 50 over the Rockies -- this is partly empirical and partly a readout of positions from magnetic pole position).

The graph for Toronto data shows a lagged appearance to the N-2 and N-1 field warmings and a corresponding wider flexed lag for N-4 and N-3. In general terms, the N-2 and N-4 are slightly ahead of a straight line (Neptune-earth-Sun) and the N-1 and N-3 sectors are bowed almost 90 degrees forward. Very little work has yet been done on segments of data, as I consider this signal to be somewhat suspect from contamination in terms of other signals with harmonic periods. This is a part of the research that needs considerable further investigation.

The assumption of downstream dissipation places the field warmings noticeably later for the CET data than for other planetary years and there is a similar look to the U-year in that the conjunction half-year is colder than the opposition half-year by 0.2 deg.

post-4238-0-87680000-1359668466_thumb.jp

post-4238-0-65096600-1359668367_thumb.jp

____________

Now that we have had a look at Uranus and Neptune, it is worth noting that in sunspot data, when Uranus passes Neptune every 171 years or so, there is often a corresponding decrease in solar activity. As I had theorized that a Jupiter-Saturn modulation process was a key part of the solar cycle, it then seemed possible that disturbance of this process from the outer planets might disrupt an otherwise regular 10-year solar cycle. What that process of disruption might be is unknown, but possibly having Uranus and Neptune combining field systems might be a clue, and this might indicate a ripple effect changing the intensity of field sectors first at Saturn then at Jupiter. Years when this opposition of Uranus and Neptune took place include 1992, 1821, 1650, and 1479. Those years can be associated with the currrent minimum, the Dalton, the Maunder and the Sporer minima. Cases before that are more speculative but there was some indication in Schove's study that the U-N weakening had been observed at other times.

Any importance of Neptune and Uranus in this study should be considered as potentially related to cosmic ray influx, a topic that I have not really had time to study in much detail, but that I have heard is being studied for relationships to climate and solar activity. While they are more distant planets than Jupiter and Saturn, they have first opportunity to interact with incoming cosmic rays. However, I just don't know if that subject area has any potential within the framework of this research, or otherwise.

______________________

The next material to be presented, in about 2-3 days, will be on Mercury and Venus with signals that are analyzed to be retrograde and unlike these outer planetary field sectors, more of a blocking of the atmosphere than ridge-building. The data sets are robust in appearance and will compare very favourably with the strongest signals we have examined so far. There is also considerable segment-based complexity that makes this quite a fascinating part of the theory (and a challenge for accurate modelling).

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...