اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدSunspot numbers based on historic records in the 1610s - early telescopic observations by Simon Marius and others
106
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Hoyt & Schatten (1998) claim that Simon Marius would have observed the sun from 1617 Jun 7 to 1618 Dec 31 (Gregorian calendar) all days, except three short gaps in 1618, but would never have detected a sunspot -- based on a quotation from Marius in Wolf (1857), but misinterpreted by Hoyt & Schatten. Marius himself specified in early 1619 that for one and a half year ... rather few or more often no spots could be detected ... which was never observed before (Marius 1619). The generic statement by Marius can be interpreted such that the active day fraction was below 0.5 (but not zero) from fall 1617 to spring 1619 and that it was 1 before fall 1617 (since August 1611). Hoyt & Schatten cite Zinner (1952), who referred to Zinner (1942), where observing dates by Marius since 1611 are given, but which were not used by Hoyt & Schatten. We present all relevant texts from Marius where he clearly stated that he observed many spots in different form on and since 1611 Aug 3 (Julian) = Aug 13 (Greg.) (on the first day together with Ahasverus Schmidnerus), 14 spots on 1612 May 30 (Julian) = Jun 9 (Greg.), which is consistent with drawings by Galilei and Jungius for that day, the latter is shown here for the first time, at least one spot on 1611 Oct 3 and/or 11 (Julian), i.e. Oct 13 and/or 21 (Greg.), when he changed his sunspot observing technique, he also mentioned that he has drawn sunspots for 1611 Nov 17 (Julian) = Nov 27 (Greg.), in addition to those clearly datable detections, there is evidence in the texts for regular observations. ... Sunspots records by Malapert from 1618 to 1621 show that the last low-latitude spot was seen in Dec 1620, while the first high-latitude spots were noticed in June and Oct 1620, so that the Schwabe cycle turnover (minimum) took place around that time, ...
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
In this article, we present the results of the surveys on sunspots and auroral candidates in Rikkokushi, Japanese Official Histories from the early 7th century to 887 to review the solar and auroral activities. In total, we found one sunspot record a
nd 13 auroral candidates in Rikkokushi. We then examine the records of the sunspots and auroral candidates, compare the auroral candidates with the lunar phase to estimate the reliability of the auroral candidates, and compare the records of the sunspots and auroral candidates with the contemporary total solar irradiance reconstructed from radioisotope data. We also identify the locations of the observational sites to review possible equatorward expansion of auroral oval. These discussions suggest a major gap of auroral candidates from the late 7th to early 9th century, which includes the minimum number of candidates reconstructed from the radioisotope data, a similar tendency as the distributions of sunspot records in contemporary China, and a relatively high magnetic latitude with a higher potential for observing aurorae more frequently than at present.
Antonio Colla was a meteorologist and astronomer who made sunspot observations at the Meteorological Observatory of the Parma University (Italy). He carried out his sunspot records from 1830 to 1843, just after the Dalton Minimum. We have recovered 7
1 observation days for this observer. Unfortunately, many of these records are qualitative and we could only obtain the number of sunspot groups and/or single sunspots from 25 observations. However, we highlight the importance of these records because Colla is not included in the sunspot group database as an observer and, therefore, neither his sunspot observations. According to the number of groups, the sunspot observations made by Colla are similar as several observers of his time. For common observation day, only Stark significantly recorded more groups than Colla. Moreover, we have calculated the sunspot area and positions from Collas sunspot drawings concluding that both areas and positions recorded by this observer seem unreal. Therefore, Collas drawings can be interpreted such as sketches including reliable information on the number of groups but the information on sunspot areas and positions should not be used for scientific purposes.
We use sunspot group observations from the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) to investigate the effects of intercalibrating data from observers with different visual acuities. The tests are made by counting the number of groups $R_B$ above a variable
cut-off threshold of observed total whole-spot area (uncorrected for foreshortening) to simulate what a lower acuity observer would have seen. The synthesised annual means of $R_B$ are then re-scaled to the observed RGO group number $R_A$ using a variety of regression techniques. It is found that a very high correlation between $R_A$ and $R_B$ ($r_{AB}$ > 0.98) does not prevent large errors in the intercalibration (e.g. sunspot maximum values can be over 30% too large even for such levels of $r_{AB}$). In generating the backbone sunspot number, Svalgaard and Schatten [2015] force regression fits to pass through the scatter plot origin which generates unreliable fits (the residuals do not form a normal distribution) and causes sunspot cycle amplitudes to be exaggerated in the intercalibrated data. It is demonstrated that the use of Quantile-Quantile (Q-Q) plots to test for a normal distribution is a useful indicator of erroneous and misleading regression fits. Ordinary least squares linear fits, not forced to pass through the origin, are sometimes reliable (although the optimum method used is shown to be different when matching peak and average sunspot group numbers). However other fits are only reliable if non-linear regression is used. From these results it is entirely possible that the inflation of solar cycle amplitudes in the backbone group sunspot number as one goes back in time, relative to related solar-terrestrial parameters, is entirely caused by the use of inappropriate and non-robust regression techniques to calibrate the sunspot data.
The annual temperature cycle of the earth closely follows the annual cycle of solar flux. At temperate latitudes, both driving and response cycles are well described by a strong annual sinusoidal component and a non-vanishing semiannual component. A
new analysis of historical weather station records in the United States determines persistent annual and semiannual variation with high precision. Historical annual temperature ranges are consistent with prior studies. Semiannual temperature cycles were much stronger than expected based on the semiannual solar driving. Instead, these cycles were consistent with multiplicative effects of two annual cycles. Our methods provide a quantitative window into the climates nonlinear response to solar driving, which is of potential value in testing climate models.
The present study is an attempt to investigate the long term variations in coronal rotation by analyzing the time series of the solar radio emission data at 2.8 GHz frequency for the period 1947 - 2009. Here, daily adjusted radio flux (known as Penti
cton flux) data are used. The autocorrelation analysis shows that the rotation period varies between 19.0 to 29.5 sidereal days (mean sidereal rotation period is 24.3 days). This variation in the coronal rotation period shows evidence of two components in the variation; (1) 22-years component which may be related to the solar magnetic field reversal cycle or Hales cycle, and (3) a component which is irregular in nature, but dominates over the other components. The crosscorrelation analysis between the annual average sunspots number and the coronal rotation period also shows evidence of its correlation with the 22-years Hales cycle. The 22-years component is found to be almost in phase with the corresponding periodicities in the variation of the sunspots number.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
