|
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
When you thought you had seen it all, this crap appears. Sun spots above the 200 but no dx conditions. What is going on out there ?? .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
Quote:
Todays sun spot number is not 200 - it is only 183 Unless other Geomagnetic conditions are present or missing - it is what it is. This appears to be some type of spam to get people to join a news group. |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Dogon wrote:
When you thought you had seen it all, this crap appears. Sun spots above the 200 but no dx conditions. What is going on out there ?? There is more to propagation than just sunspot numbers. Here's some links: http://www.arrl.org/here-comes-the-sun http://www.arrl.org/the-sun-the-earth-the-ionosphere http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Techn...df/0209038.pdf -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"FBMboomer" wrote: My question to you is - how educated are you and where did you get the number 200 from, and do you understand the theory behind sun spot This appears to be some type of spam to get people to join a news group. Dogon, Please ignore ignorant crap from Channel Jumper. He can't help being an idiot. His questioning of your education is simply projection on his part. His attempt at trying to sound important and educated is obviously lame and transparent. He also has self-esteem problems. There was nothing wrong with your post and expresses all of our frustration at poor propagation lately. Hi FBMboomer. this newsgroup is renound for its SHILLS !! And above we see the reality about this. He is a NWO shill and doesn't want that we discover alarming stuff. And his arrogance gives him (it) away. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
About SHILL "Channel Jumper". -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. -The earth magnetic field weakens at alarming rate, 10 times faster then expected : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7X8FTGCHGs -There is global cooling and record ice at the poles. (CO2 taxes) Channel Jumper is a NWO paid SHILL who wants us to go to sleep and think there's nothing wrong. How small minded. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Dogon wrote:
Why are you responding to my post with this utter crap? snip crap -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
|
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
wrote crap:
Dogon wrote: Why are you responding to my post with this utter crap? snip crap Jim Pennino You are NOT a ham-operator at all ! You respond like this because i don't fall into your trap. Free energy !! : www.peswiki.com or www.overunity.com Or: www.overunityresearch.com The sun is dead. www.nasa.org The magnetic field of the earth is dying fast. www.google.com This place is full of SHILLS because ham radio people could uncover the truth ! NWO paid SHILLS who wants us to go to sleep and think there's nothing wrong. They see us as stupid how they would be themselves. How small minded. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote:
"Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. So much for your hogwash. Time for you to get a new tin hat. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Dogon wrote:
wrote crap: Dogon wrote: Why are you responding to my post with this utter crap? snip crap Jim Pennino You are NOT a ham-operator at all ! You respond like this because i don't fall into your trap. Free energy !! : www.peswiki.com or www.overunity.com Or: www.overunityresearch.com The sun is dead. www.nasa.org The magnetic field of the earth is dying fast. www.google.com This place is full of SHILLS because ham radio people could uncover the truth ! NWO paid SHILLS who wants us to go to sleep and think there's nothing wrong. They see us as stupid how they would be themselves. How small minded. Were you born this way or are you on drugs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Dogon wrote:
"Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. http://solar-center.stanford.edu/observe/ Requirements: Two sheets of stiff paper, a pin, and the ability to punch a hole in one of the sheets of paper without sticking yourself with the pin. The last requirement may be a bit much for you. -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 17:06:19 +0200, "Dogon" wrote:
"Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. How to make a pinhole helioscope: http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~slowe/transit2004/observe.html http://www.glasseye.f9.co.uk/oddworld/oddpages/helioscp.html http://www.exploratorium.edu/eclipse/how.html Do it thyself sunspot counting: http://spaceweather.com/sunspots/doityourself.html Perfect for a pinhead like yourself. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"Brian Morrison" On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 17:06:19 +0200 Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Show me one what, sunspot or helioscope? What a question ! Somebody with the real sunspots ofcourse ! How old are you and do you know where you get into ? .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote (tried to) On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. What a dumb reaction ! Ofcourse the pictures are the same ! That was not the issue ! The issue was the FALSE sunspots count. Can you read man ? .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"Jeff Liebermann" wrote On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 17:06:19 +0200, "Dogon" wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. How to make a pinhole helioscope: http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~slowe/transit2004/observe.html http://www.glasseye.f9.co.uk/oddworld/oddpages/helioscp.html http://www.exploratorium.edu/eclipse/how.html Do it thyself sunspot counting: http://spaceweather.com/sunspots/doityourself.html Perfect for a pinhead like yourself. Jeff Liebermann Another s.o.b. manipulated victim here. Man are you retarded. Are you a full licenced radio amateur ? A kindergarten reaction was that. Ham radio is also about wanting to believe in a 'package of enslaving ideas' not to forget Einstein. Yes he is true. my ass.. Smart questions like : how do you know this are not asked here. Because of the incapability to be smart by the respondees. * Its easier becomming a dr. in the usa then becomming farmer in Belgium. .. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Dogon wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote (tried to) On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. What a dumb reaction ! Ofcourse the pictures are the same ! That was not the issue ! The issue was the FALSE sunspots count. Can you read man ? What false sunspot counts? As anyone with two sheets of paper and a pin can easily count and verify the sunspot numbers, this has to be the dumbest conspiracy post ever to appear on USENET. -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On 7/16/2014 3:25 PM, Dogon wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote (tried to) On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. What a dumb reaction ! Ofcourse the pictures are the same ! That was not the issue ! The issue was the FALSE sunspots count. Can you read man ? Sure, I can read. But you obviously cannot understand what's plainly in front of your face. If the sunspot numbers were fudged, as you claim, then the images could NOT have matched. And thousands of amateur astronomers around the world would have seen and reported on the discrepancy. You need to put your tin hat back on. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote On 7/16/2014 3:25 PM, Dogon wrote: "Jerry Stuckle" wrote (tried to) On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. What a dumb reaction ! Ofcourse the pictures are the same ! That was not the issue ! The issue was the FALSE sunspots count. Can you read man ? Sure, I can read. But you obviously cannot understand what's plainly in front of your face. If the sunspot numbers were fudged, as you claim, then the images could NOT have matched. And thousands of amateur astronomers around the world would have seen and reported on the discrepancy. No it aint that simple. In 2012 the supposed 'peak', the sun was mostly BLANK ! So if you can put one and one together; there couldn't be 125 sunspots. The HEAD of the solar dept. from NASA said also to underline this with: "The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar MINIMUM in nearly a century." End quote. I know all to well that radio amateurs don't want to think outside the box, but technicaly they changed the count from 'human eye' to computer count. You and i know that a computer sees always something. A fraction darker pixel etc. Every astronomer ? Well look for 'dead astronomers' and you will be horrified. And what about the physical evidence ? For how long is 80 mtrs useless now ? We live in a solarpeak ?? How many have you experienced ?? These shills here want to suppress any rumor about 'magnetic pole' reversal due to this: http://poleshift.ning.com among others. It is that serious folks. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 16:31:46 -0400, Jerry Stuckle
wrote: If the sunspot numbers were fudged, as you claim, then the images could NOT have matched. And thousands of amateur astronomers around the world would have seen and reported on the discrepancy. I don't know much about sunspot counting, so I thought it might be useful to Google for how it's done: http://spaceweather.com/glossary/sunspotnumber.html Looks like we have the "Boulder Sunspot Number" and the "International Sunspot Number". Boulder is about 25% higher than International. The ARRL uses the "Wolf number" from Zurich: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_number http://sidc.oma.be/silso/ This month's count. Note the wide variation: http://sidc.oma.be/silso/eisnplot Average? Ok, that's explained in the FAQ: http://sidc.oma.be/silso/faq-page From the SpaceWeather page, counting your own might be problematic: As a rule of thumb, if you divide either of the official sunspot numbers by 15, you'll get the approximate number of individual sunspots visible on the solar disk if you look at the Sun by projecting its image on a paper plate with a small telescope. Hmmm... Maybe I didn't want to know more about sunspots. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On 7/17/2014 10:58 AM, Dogon wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote On 7/16/2014 3:25 PM, Dogon wrote: "Jerry Stuckle" wrote (tried to) On 7/15/2014 11:06 AM, Dogon wrote: "Brian Morrison" wrote On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:17:40 +0200 Dogon wrote: -The sunspot-count is falsified since a long time now. So how do you prevent people with their own helioscopes from counting the true number of spots? Brian Morrison Because they don't excist ! Show me one. Our local astronomy club has several (it has a lot of members, although I'm not one of them). And once or twice a year, they hold a public viewing of the sun for anyone interested. And their pictures always match the ones you find on the NASA site - at least the couple of times I've been there. What a dumb reaction ! Ofcourse the pictures are the same ! That was not the issue ! The issue was the FALSE sunspots count. Can you read man ? Sure, I can read. But you obviously cannot understand what's plainly in front of your face. If the sunspot numbers were fudged, as you claim, then the images could NOT have matched. And thousands of amateur astronomers around the world would have seen and reported on the discrepancy. No it aint that simple. In 2012 the supposed 'peak', the sun was mostly BLANK ! So if you can put one and one together; there couldn't be 125 sunspots. The HEAD of the solar dept. from NASA said also to underline this with: "The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar MINIMUM in nearly a century." End quote. I know all to well that radio amateurs don't want to think outside the box, but technicaly they changed the count from 'human eye' to computer count. You and i know that a computer sees always something. A fraction darker pixel etc. Every astronomer ? Well look for 'dead astronomers' and you will be horrified. And what about the physical evidence ? For how long is 80 mtrs useless now ? We live in a solarpeak ?? How many have you experienced ?? These shills here want to suppress any rumor about 'magnetic pole' reversal due to this: http://poleshift.ning.com among others. It is that serious folks. Sure, it's simple. You claimed the sunspot counts were fudged. It's very simple with a helioscope to count the number of sunspots. Yes, the sun may be going through another Maunder Minimum - that is unknown at this time, and scientists don't completely understand what's occurring. But that does NOT mean the counts are incorrect. Radio amateurs constantly "think outside the box". That's where innovation occurs, and hams have done a lot of innovation. And computer counting is not just one shot - there are many pictures of the sun taken every minute; a single "dark pixel" will quickly be filtered out. However, that's another one of your straw man arguments and shows just how little you know - with the magnification used, a single sunspot covers much more than one pixel. As for the magnetic pole reversal - that's no secret, and has been discussed quite extensively in many publications. But that's not uncommon; it happens at intervals of 100K to 1M years, with an average of 450K years. Since the last reversal was 780K years ago, we are overdue. Just google "geomagnetic pole reversal" and you'll get all kinds of hits. It's never wiped out life on earth, or even had a major effect on life. It just changed the direction of compasses. And since a shift takes 1K to 10K years, I doubt my compass will be pointing south in my lifetime. You REALLY need to put your tin hat back on! You're only showing your gross ignorance. And BTW - I've been a ham for over 46 years. YOU figure out how many solar peaks I've been through (hint: they occur about every 11 years). But then we also know you're not a ham. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
No it aint that simple. In 2012 the supposed 'peak', the sun was mostly BLANK ! So if you can put one and one together; there couldn't be 125 sunspots. The HEAD of the solar dept. from NASA said also to underline this with: "The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar MINIMUM in nearly a century." End quote. I know all to well that radio amateurs don't want to think outside the box, but technicaly they changed the count from 'human eye' to computer count. You and i know that a computer sees always something. A fraction darker pixel etc. Every astronomer ? Well look for 'dead astronomers' and you will be horrified. And what about the physical evidence ? For how long is 80 mtrs useless now ? We live in a solarpeak ?? How many have you experienced ?? These shills here want to suppress any rumor about 'magnetic pole' reversal due to this: http://poleshift.ning.com among others. It is that serious folks. Sure, it's simple. You claimed the sunspot counts were fudged. It's very simple with a helioscope to count the number of sunspots. Yes, the sun may be going through another Maunder Minimum - that is unknown at this time, and scientists don't completely understand what's occurring. But that does NOT mean the counts are incorrect. Radio amateurs constantly "think outside the box". That's where innovation occurs, and hams have done a lot of innovation. And computer counting is not just one shot - there are many pictures of the sun taken every minute; a single "dark pixel" will quickly be filtered out. However, that's another one of your straw man arguments and shows just how little you know - with the magnification used, a single sunspot covers much more than one pixel. As for the magnetic pole reversal - that's no secret, and has been discussed quite extensively in many publications. But that's not uncommon; it happens at intervals of 100K to 1M years, with an average of 450K years. Since the last reversal was 780K years ago, we are overdue. Just google "geomagnetic pole reversal" and you'll get all kinds of hits. It's never wiped out life on earth, or even had a major effect on life. It just changed the direction of compasses. And since a shift takes 1K to 10K years, I doubt my compass will be pointing south in my lifetime. You REALLY need to put your tin hat back on! You're only showing your gross ignorance. And BTW - I've been a ham for over 46 years. YOU figure out how many solar peaks I've been through (hint: they occur about every 11 years). But then we also know you're not a ham. Hi Jerry, I too am an old duffer. I got my license in 1955. I am 71 now and still in good health. Has to be some kind of miracle there for my wife and I both to still be in good health. Conspiracy theories are very popular and some who have little education jump on any that come along. I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories myself. However, I still question the Warren report. I believe there were other forces at work beyond Oswald. A lot of nutters confuse magnetic pole reversal with actual reversal of our rotational poles. Of course that would be catastrophic and makes much more interesting reading. Anyway, back to ham radio. I have certainly seen a lot of different propagation conditions on many bands in my lifetime. I can remember when I was 12 and could use very low power, read that as 10 watts on CW and talk to the world. My equipment was very primitive. My first receiver was a Knight kit space spanner. A regenerative receiver. I had to mow lawns and clear brush to buy my equipment or the parts to build equipment and it was a lot of work just gathering 10 dollars together. I still remember when I did my first single transistor radio. The transistor was a Raytheon CK722 that cost me 7 dollars. I treasured that little germanium transistor like it was gold. When I was 13, I discovered how to make alcohol in my home built still. I found that far more profitable. I worked my way up to a Halicrafters SX100 and a Multi-Elmac transmitter with a home made power supply. I felt like this was the Cadillac of ham gear at the time. Unfortunately, after a couple of years, the sheriff discovered who was selling all the moonshine in our county. I was lucky. I just got yelled at and had to sink all my moonshine equipment in our lake. I was devastated. I only thought of myself as an entrepreneur. There I was 14, and jobless. I finally got a job driving truck when I turned 16 after school to support my rather expensive habit. I was kinda like a junky. There was always more equipment to want and buy. When I finally graduated from high school I had more equipment than was ever necessary to operate on the ham bands. I was an obsessed teenager. W8EZI formerly WN7EZI |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On 7/10/2014 11:08 AM, Dogon wrote:
When you thought you had seen it all, this crap appears. Sun spots above the 200 but no dx conditions. That sure ended quick! http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/07/...han-a-century/ Mikek |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Today's sunspot count is '0'. ? How long will this sudden honesty last ? One could argue if what i claim is true, the bands would be dead. And they are ! The evidence is at your face: the 80 mtr, 49 mtr en even the 31 mtr bands are dead. This never ever happened before. The sw spectrum below 10 Mc's is completely dead. A tell tale of what is to come. If you are technical you should ask : why ? The answer is A rougue planet named Nibiru. Look for 'Nibiru orbit.' This thing has such a massive magnetic field around it that disrupts earth's field. Thia planet is darker then coal so no astronomer can observe this. If so it won't make the Massive Media Blackout ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AW-z...layer_embedded Thanks to the stupid reacting shills here who made me angy ! Strange news on spacewheater yesterday.: (just a few days after i wrote my posting!) "WHERE DID ALL THE SUNSPOTS GO? This week, solar activity has sharply declined. There is only one numbered sunspot on the Earth-facing side of the sun, and it is so small you might have trouble finding it." Ofcourse i have collected a lot of sun pics evidence, who looked blank, with a spotcount on that day of '125' and other nonsense. .. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:02:02 +0200, "Dogon" wrote:
Strange news on spacewheater yesterday.: (just a few days after i wrote my posting!) "WHERE DID ALL THE SUNSPOTS GO? This week, solar activity has sharply declined. There is only one numbered sunspot on the Earth-facing side of the sun, and it is so small you might have trouble finding it." Aren't you suspicious why the sunspot count dropped so suddenly? It's because the sunspots were never there. Someone cleaned the lenses on the sunspot counting helioscopes thus removing all the sunspots. In the past, it was traditional to clean the lenses every 11 years, but I guess they're not following that schedule any more. Most likely, the helioscope keepers were on summer vacation, and their temporary replacements didn't know any better. However, not to worry. The sunspot count should return to normal as the dust accumulates. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:02:02 +0200, "Dogon" wrote: Strange news on spacewheater yesterday.: (just a few days after i wrote my posting!) "WHERE DID ALL THE SUNSPOTS GO? This week, solar activity has sharply declined. There is only one numbered sunspot on the Earth-facing side of the sun, and it is so small you might have trouble finding it." Aren't you suspicious why the sunspot count dropped so suddenly? It's because the sunspots were never there. Someone cleaned the lenses on the sunspot counting helioscopes thus removing all the sunspots. In the past, it was traditional to clean the lenses every 11 years, but I guess they're not following that schedule any more. Most likely, the helioscope keepers were on summer vacation, and their temporary replacements didn't know any better. However, not to worry. The sunspot count should return to normal as the dust accumulates. Yep, up to 26 already. -- Jim Pennino |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 17:11:27 -0000, wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:02:02 +0200, "Dogon" wrote: Strange news on spacewheater yesterday.: (just a few days after i wrote my posting!) "WHERE DID ALL THE SUNSPOTS GO? This week, solar activity has sharply declined. There is only one numbered sunspot on the Earth-facing side of the sun, and it is so small you might have trouble finding it." Aren't you suspicious why the sunspot count dropped so suddenly? It's because the sunspots were never there. Someone cleaned the lenses on the sunspot counting helioscopes thus removing all the sunspots. In the past, it was traditional to clean the lenses every 11 years, but I guess they're not following that schedule any more. Most likely, the helioscope keepers were on summer vacation, and their temporary replacements didn't know any better. However, not to worry. The sunspot count should return to normal as the dust accumulates. Yep, up to 26 already. Ok, the official lens cleaners are back from vacation. Let the counting continue. Looks like there's some disagreement on predictions. The SM (standard method) predicts a drop, while the CM (combined method) predicts a slightly rising number: http://sidc.oma.be/silso/kalmansmcm http://sidc.oma.be/silso/ssngraphics Toss a coin. Just for fun, I grabbed the data files for the recent monthly numbers from: http://sidc.oma.be/silso/INFO/issndheminfocsv.php http://sidc.oma.be/silso/datafiles and plotted them from 2000 to May 2014 without smoothing, filtering, tweaking, or massaging. Well, I added a second order polynomial trend line, which predicts an increase: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.xls Maybe toss another coin. The scatter plot shows huge variations from month to month. I would expect much the same for daily variations. If the sunspot number hits zero occasionally, I would not be surprised. Trying to predict propagation from a single daily point is not going to be easy. Disclaimer: I know little about sunspots and this is all new to me. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 11:30:22 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.xls No brain today. The graph is the DAILY sunspot count, not monthly. Sorry(tm). -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On 7/19/2014 1:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 11:30:22 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.xls No brain today. The graph is the DAILY sunspot count, not monthly. Sorry(tm). Picture from 7-18, http://www.latimes.com/science/scien...718-story.html --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
The next crap; many sunspots and no conditions !
On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 15:20:50 -0500, amdx wrote:
On 7/19/2014 1:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 11:30:22 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/sunspots/Sunspots-2000-2014.xls No brain today. The graph is the DAILY sunspot count, not monthly. Sorry(tm). Picture from 7-18, http://www.latimes.com/science/scien...718-story.html Well, we have the Maunder Minimum which lasted about 70 years, the Dalton Minimum which lasted 40 years, and a few others that lasted maybe 5 years. All corresponded to global cooling and miniature ice ages. That begs the question whether a one day drop in the sunspot count is worthy of a unique name. Certainly some governing body could award the naming of a sunspot minimum to the first observer who notices the lack of sunspots. I would volunteer to be the first to have a one day sunspot minimum named after me, but since I wasn't the first to notice, the prize should go to someone else. More to the point of this group, the 2.8GHz (10.7cm) solar flux follows the sunspot cycle. For propagation, I guess that's more interesting than counting suspots. http://www.spaceweather.gc.ca/solarflux/sx-eng.php Last 7 days data: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/lists/radio/7day_rad.txt Looks like 2.8GHz radio flux dropped as fast as the sunspot count. http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/quar_DSD.txt Solar update from the ARRL. http://www.arrl.org/news/the-k7ra-solar-update-331 Lot of good links and reading included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:36 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com