Researchers suggest a link between the solar cycle and the tidal effects of Venus, the Earth and Jupiter

October 4, 2016, Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres
Every 11 years the polarity of the sun's magnetic field is reversed. Could the weak tidal forces of Venus, the Earth and Jupiter directly influence the sun's activity? Credit: NASA/SDO

The Sun's activity is determined by the Sun's magnetic field. Two combined effects are responsible for the latter: The omega and the alpha effect. Exactly where and how the alpha effect originates is currently unknown. Researchers at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR) are putting forward a new theory for this in the journal Solar Physics. Their calculations suggest that tidal forces from Venus, the Earth and Jupiter can directly influence the Sun's activity.

Many questions regarding the Sun's are still unanswered. "As with the Earth, we are dealing with a dynamo. Through self-excitation, a magnetic field is created from virtually nothing, whereby the complex movement of the conductive plasma serves as an energy source," says the physicist Dr. Frank Stefani from HZDR. The Sun's so-called alpha-omega dynamo is subject to a regular cycle. Approximately every eleven years the polarity of the Sun's magnetic field is reversed, with solar activity peaking with the same frequency. This manifests itself in an increase in sunspots - dark patches on the Sun's surface which originate from strongly concentrated magnetic fields.

"Interestingly, every 11.07 years, the Sun and the planets Venus, the Earth and Jupiter are aligned. We asked ourselves: Is it a coincidence that the solar cycle corresponds with the cycle of the conjunction or the opposition of the three planets?" ponders Stefani. Although this question is by no means new, up to now scientists could not identify a plausible physical mechanism for how the very weak tidal effects of Venus, the Earth and Jupiter could influence the Sun's dynamo.

Solar cycle. Credit: SOHO (ESA & NASA)
Strengthening through resonance

"If you only just give a swing small pushes, it will swing higher with time," as Frank Stefani explains the principle of resonance. He and his team discovered in recent calculations that the alpha effect is prone to oscillations under certain conditions. "The impulse for this alpha-oscillation requires almost no energy. The planetary tides could act as sufficient pace setters for this." The so-called Tayler instability plays a crucial role for the resonance of the Sun's dynamo. It always arises when a strong enough current flows through a conductive liquid or a plasma. Above a certain strength, the interaction of the current with its own magnetic field generates a flow - in the case of the colossal Sun, a turbulent one.

It is generally understood that the solar dynamo relies on the interaction of two induction mechanisms. Largely undisputed is the omega effect, which originates in the tachocline. This is the name of a narrow band between the Sun's inner radiative zone and the outer areas in which convection takes place, where heat is transported using the movement of the hot plasma. In the tachocline, various, differentially rotating areas converge. This differential rotation generates the so-called toroidal magnetic field in the form of two "life belts" situated north and south of the solar equator.

The Tayler instability poses a serios danger to novel liquid-metal batteries. Credit: HZDR
A new recipe for the solar Dynamo

There is significant lack of clarity regarding the position and cause of the alpha effect, which uses the toroidal field to create a poloidal field - the latter running along the Sun's lines of longitude. According to a prevalent theory, the alpha effect's place of origin is near the sunspots, on the Sun's surface. The Dresden researchers have chosen an alternative approach which links the alpha effect to the right- or left-handedness of the Tayler instability. In turn, the Tayler instability arises due to strongly developed toroidal fields in the tachocline. "That way we can essentially also locate the alpha effect in the tachocline," says Frank Stefani.

Now the HZDR scientists have discovered the first evidence for the Tayler instability also oscillating back and forth between right- and left-handedness. What is special about this is that the reversal happens with virtually no change to the flow energy. This means that very small forces are enough to initiate an oscillation in the alpha effect. "Our calculations show that planetary act here as minute external pace setters. The oscillation in the alpha effect, which is triggered approximately every eleven years, could cause the polarity reversal of the and, ultimately, dictate the 22-year cycle of the solar dynamo," according to Stefani.

The scientists surrounding Frank Stefani have been researching magnetic fields in the cosmos and on Earth for many years. They were also the first group in the world to successfully prove both the Tayler instability and the magnetorotational instability in laboratory experiments. In 1999, the specialists in magnetohydrodynamics were also involved in the first demonstration of the homogeneous dynamo effect in Riga.

The Tayler instability restricts new liquid-metal batteries

"Interestingly, we stumbled upon the Tayler instability in the context of our research into new liquid-metal batteries, which are currently being investigated as possible inexpensive storage containers for the strongly fluctuating solar energy," explains Frank Stefani. The fundamental principle of liquid-metal batteries is extremely simple. It consists of two liquid metals of differing densities - the electrodes - which are only separated by a thin layer of salt. The benefits are an extremely quick charging time, an (at least theoretically) infinite number of charging cycles and low costs, if a battery which is one square meter in size can successfully be produced. "For these batteries, the Tayler instability poses a serious danger because it inevitably arises when the cells get bigger and bigger. Without certain technological tricks, which we have already patented, the Tayler instability would destroy the battery's stratification," adds Stefani.

Explore further: Stars, jets and batteries: Multi-faceted magnetic phenomenon confirmed in the laboratory for the first time

More information: F. Stefani et al, Synchronized Helicity Oscillations: A Link Between Planetary Tides and the Solar Cycle?, Solar Physics (2016). DOI: 10.1007/s11207-016-0968-0

Related Stories

Magnetic fields slow down stars

June 13, 2012

Scientists have proved the existence of a magnetic effect that could explain why solar-like stars spin very slowly at the end of their lifetime.

Cosmic turbulences result in star and black hole formation

August 15, 2013

Just how stars and black holes in the Universe are able to form from rotating matter is one of the big questions of astrophysics. What we do know is that magnetic fields figure prominently into the picture. However, our current ...

Mercury's magnetic field -- nipped in the bud

December 23, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Mercury, the smallest of the eight planets with a diameter of 4900 kilometres and the closest to the Sun, looks more like the Moon than the Earth from the outside. It is the only rocky planet that has a global ...

Magnetic fields on solar-type stars

December 12, 2014

The Sun rotates slowly, about once every 24 days at its equator although the hot gas at every latitude rotates at a slightly different rate. Rotation helps to drive the mechanisms that power stellar magnetic fields, and in ...

Recommended for you

A decade on, smartphone-like software finally heads to space

March 20, 2019

Once a traditional satellite is launched into space, its physical hardware and computer software stay mostly immutable for the rest of its existence as it orbits the Earth, even as the technology it serves on the ground continues ...

40 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 04, 2016
I think Zephyr had made claims about Jupiter's effects on the 11 year cycle. But he along with these folks have it backwards, the Sun's 11 year cycle is what drives these conjunctions.
Captain Stumpy
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2016
But he along with these folks have it backwards, the Sun's 11 year cycle is what drives these conjunctions.
@cantthink
at best, this is an "untested claim" - http://www.auburn...ion.html

but considering you've yet to be able to provide any evidence from any reputable or scientific source to support your claims (even of your EDM claims) then it is far more likely to be a "false claim"

either post a supporting link/reference from a reputable peer reviewed science journal or STFU with your religious proselytizing for the eu cult
panurg3
1.1 / 5 (8) Oct 04, 2016
But he along with these folks have it backwards, the Sun's 11 year cycle is what drives these conjunctions.
@cantthink
at best, this is an "untested claim" - http://www.auburn...ion.html

but considering you've yet to be able to provide any evidence from any reputable or scientific source to support your claims (even of your EDM claims) then it is far more likely to be a "false claim"

either post a supporting link/reference from a reputable peer reviewed science journal or STFU with your religious proselytizing for the eu cult


i suppose new paradigms can be hard to recognize. it is not possible at this stage of human science to quantify our base assumptions; our pictures of what is going on. there is all kinds of evidence, yea a datamine trove, for any number of world-pictures (paradigms) such as this and other PO articles that "bring out the nutters". but seriously what if the "next leap in understanding",
panurg3
2.9 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2016
such as a Galileo shift, rests upon a re-interpretation of the data such that it can change the course of all science, even though many of its specific predictions may turn out false. So we can go back to the "usefulness" criteria for science, but one never knows about future usefulness. how long was it between the discovery of sulfur and the invention of gunpowder?

whatever. but dudes, the stakes are not that high here. crazy wrong ideas can sometimes even spur something useful. Newton was definitely a nutter.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (12) Oct 04, 2016
The theorists have gone to great lengths to avoid any mention of electric currents. Plainly, a planetary conjunction can imply a more direct route for charge transfer.
Zorcon
5 / 5 (2) Oct 04, 2016
...the Sun's 11 year cycle is what drives these conjunctions.


I don't think you understand the word "conjunction" in this context, lol.
optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.2 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2016
but seriously what if the "next leap in understanding"....rests upon a re-interpretation of the data such that it can change the course of all science...
@panurg3
there is a big difference in speculation about science and scientific speculation

the former uses imagination and refuses to comply with the known knowns, validated science or the stuff we really do know... you can call this "science fiction" in that it says it's about science but it only uses it as a topical means to draw in the ignorant or illiterate

the latter uses evidence or a logical procedure, often called the scientific method, to derive a means to a testable hypothesis that is sans bias, which in turn leads to a means to validate or falsify things.
for a simplification, see: https://en.wikipe...cess.svg

optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
HannesAlfven
2.1 / 5 (11) Oct 04, 2016
Re: "but considering you've yet to be able to provide any evidence from any reputable or scientific source to support your claims (even of your EDM claims) then it is far more likely to be a "false claim" ... either post a supporting link/reference from a reputable peer reviewed science journal or STFU with your religious proselytizing for the eu cult"

Ah yes, a "true" thought cannot be had without a reference!

(Why does the image of a Catholic nun beating little children on the hand come to mind?)
optical
Oct 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RealityCheck
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2016
Hi optical. :)
...the global warming could be of cosmic origin,...
Please recall my longstanding explanation that it's ATMOSPHERE that determines NET energy state resulting from ALL energy inputs (whether EXTERNALLY from Sun or INTERNALLY from Earth's compression/fission).

The example I gave was MERCURY planet: which is lacking any significant persistent atmosphere to TRAP energy as heat; which is why MERCURY planet is COLD on 'night' side and HOT on 'day' side....DESPITE HIGH energy input from Sun!

So you see, it doesn't matter what source/quantity of energy INPUT, it's ATMOSPHERE effect that determines the NET STATE which develops...whatever the inputs/sources.

For instance, even in some deserts at night, the temps fall to freezing if the atmosphere is clear enough to allow the excess heat to escape to space/upper atmosphere layers.

So EXCESS CO2 effects (in addition to whatever Greenhouse gases/effects applied previously) that determines NEW NET STATE. :)
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (14) Oct 04, 2016
The theorists have gone to great lengths to avoid any mention of electric currents. Plainly, a planetary conjunction can imply a more direct route for charge transfer.


What electric currents? Where have they been seen? Reference, please.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (15) Oct 04, 2016
@HA/CR,
Ah yes, a "true" thought cannot be had without a reference!


Perhaps you could then just refer us to an unpublished hypothesis, that has the requisite mechanism, plus gives us the numbers involved. As it stands, EU has nothing. That is the whole idea. They never want to tie themselves down to anything even remotely approaching a hypothesis. To easy for people to say "you got it wrong", when it all goes tits up. Like the electric comet rubbish.
Best to remain as vague as possible, and carry on their anti-science tactic of attacking real science, whilst doing absolutely none of their own.
Not that there is anyone within that cult actually capable of doing the science.

gculpex
1 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2016
Perhaps you could then just refer us to an unpublished hypothesis, that has the requisite mechanism, plus gives us the numbers involved. As it stands, EU has nothing.
Not that there is anyone within that cult actually capable of doing the science.

No electric universe? then what is your brain running on?- gravity? weak or strong force? Proof is all around you, open your eyes, not someone's mathematical mumbo jumbo.

If you really wanted to, you can make 1 + 1 = 2,3,4,5...
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (9) Oct 05, 2016
Says the guy, whose only method is the downvoting and reporting posts at personal basis?
@zephTROLL
1- it aint personal. it's about the evidence - something you rarely have and usually f*ck up when you do attempt to interpret it and post it
LOL
and i seldom report anyone except those who deserve it (or ask for it)

2- you're the one with the sock army and more than 100 profiles, mass-rating when you get pissed and intentionally downrating others and uprating yourself with said army simply because you can't find any evidence for your claims

but you want to call out someone for asking for evidence and preferring science over religious stupidity like you?
ROTFLMFAO

hey zeph: if ya can prove your crap with evidence, why the sock army?
how many times have you been banned because of the same tactic of sock army and pseudoscience?

don't just tell us about here, but tell us about every site you get banhammered from!
lets compare bans for pseudoscience - LOL
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (14) Oct 05, 2016

No electric universe? then what is your brain running on?- gravity? weak or strong force? Proof is all around you, open your eyes, not someone's mathematical mumbo jumbo.

If you really wanted to, you can make 1 + 1 = 2,3,4,5...


I'm talking (for the hard of understanding), about the collection of scientifically illiterate souls, assembled by David Talbott (mythologist) & Wallace Thornhill (EE?), who regularly come up with a pile of of crap to describe various phenomena (for which there is plenty of evidence) by using ridiculous, evidence-free, unscientific woo, simply on the basis of being anti-science, and their belief that Earth used to orbit Saturn. That is the Electric Universe I'm talking about. Got it?
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (12) Oct 05, 2016
No electric universe?


Yep, the same ones who brought us this:
http://www.imageb...07937004

And told us: "Comets are just asteroids on elliptical orbits." Lol.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 05, 2016
But he along with these folks have it backwards, the Sun's 11 year cycle is what drives these conjunctions

How the rotation of solar plasma could drive the Kepler law and eleven year standing orbital period of Jupiter? You're essentially saying, that the solar plasma controls distance of Jupiter from Sun by the speed of its stirring. Such a way of thinking lacks intuition and basic sense for physical reality.

Maybe you could point to where such an asinine idea was proffered, other than by yourself of course.
barakn
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2016
On the contrary: everything in solar system doesn't encircle the Sun, but the barycenter of solar system... -orbital/zephir
No, they don't. You have given the barycenter, a mathematical construct, an unwarranted physical significance. The barycenter is the center of mass, or, if you will, the average of the positions of all the objects in the solar system weighted by their mass. The barycenter is a linear function of position, but the force of gravity is an inverse square force. This means that the terrestrial planets, because not only are they closer to the Sun than they are to Jupiter but also because the Sun is so much more massive, definitely "circle" the Sun, not the barycenter, although minor corrections must be made due to the minor influences of the other planets, moons, asteroids, etc.. Planets further out would appear to "circle" the barycenter but only because the Sun and Jupiter are, relatively speaking, a similar distance away and always in the same area of sky.
optical
Oct 05, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2016
The planets, and indeed the Sun, will actually orbit the barycentre of the solar system. It is due to this that we can discover exoplanets via the radial velocity method.

http://homepages....nter.pdf

http://www.planet...ity.html

The same applies to the Earth-Moon system: https://www.youtu...ANgbRkws
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2016
The "barycenter" reflects the helical motion of the Sun as it traverses the galaxy.

https://www.youtu...axQGPg7I

The helical electric currents which power the Sun (and drive the 22 year cycle) provide the "path" with which the Sun travels.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Oct 05, 2016
The "barycenter" reflects the helical motion of the Sun as it traverses the galaxy.

https://www.youtu...axQGPg7I

The helical electric currents which power the Sun (and drive the 22 year cycle) provide the "path" with which the Sun travels.


A) No, it doesn't, not in the context that it is being discussed here:
https://en.wikipe...rycenter

B) And which electric currents would they be? I must have missed that paper. Please provide a link.
gculpex
1 / 5 (3) Oct 05, 2016

No electric universe? then what is your brain running on?- gravity? weak or strong force? Proof is all around you, open your eyes, not someone's mathematical mumbo jumbo.

If you really wanted to, you can make 1 + 1 = 2,3,4,5...


That is the Electric Universe I'm talking about. Got it?


No, you don't get it.
Benni
2 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2016
either post a supporting link/reference from a reputable peer reviewed science journal or STFU with your religious proselytizing for the eu cult
..............and all you do is proselytize for the Rant Cult which makes you no different than those you accuse for doing what you also do, in addition to not even presenting a cogent contribution about the subject matter. Retired old firemen like you should stay that way.......retired.

barakn
3 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2016
I would like to thank bschott personally for giving a 1 vote to a post that was 100% accurate about the barycenter. 20 years ago, to investigate Landscheidt's theories on "solar angular momentum" vs. solar activity, I downloaded, modified, and compiled source code for a solar system N-body simulation from JPL. The code used the barycenter as the center of an inertial reference frame, and even calculated the magnitude of the inevitable small amount of error resulting from rounding, ignoring higher order terms in Einsteinian gravity, etc., by calculating after every time tick the difference from the Sun's calculated position vs. where it should have been to keep the barycenter at 0,0,0. I know more about the barycenter than you could hope to learn in a century.
Maggnus
3 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2016
Errata: "like the overheated coffee" = "like the boiling of overheated coffee". The sunspots are analogy of bubbles inside the boiling fluid: they're formed beneath surface of Sun from overheated plasma and they driven upwards thanks to solar plasma circulation like the giant vortex rings. When the plasma circulation stops, then the sunspots also cannot emerge at the surface of Sun. Once the solar plasma circulates from north pole to south one, then the accumulated sunspots rise to the surface at the opposite side of equator.

Quack. Water ducks on the solar surface.
barakn
3.3 / 5 (7) Oct 06, 2016
Speaking of Landscheidt, after hundreds of hours of research I stumbled on a "paper" of his where he revealed that buried in his cycles were moments where the phase could change, and even he himself could not predict which way it would go. In other words the delusional fool had created a mathematical shape based on the sun's "orbital angular momentum" but had enough joints in it that it could be bent to fit the shape of any climate data he applied it to. I'm not surprised zephir/orbital is a proponent of Landscheidt's pseudoscientific claptrap, even if he/she can't spell the name correctly.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Oct 06, 2016

No electric universe? then what is your brain running on?- gravity? weak or strong force? Proof is all around you, open your eyes, not someone's mathematical mumbo jumbo.

If you really wanted to, you can make 1 + 1 = 2,3,4,5...


That is the Electric Universe I'm talking about. Got it?


No, you don't get it.


Oh, I do. You talk scientifically illiterate crap, and try to pretend that it has any relevance to *actual* science. If you've got some papers that might disabuse me of that view, then please link them.
2 provisos- a) they must be within the last 10 years and, b) they must be from a reputable peer reviewed journal.
optical
Oct 06, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RNP
4.4 / 5 (7) Oct 06, 2016
@optical
The promoters of Electric universe are fighting with mainstream science - but in reality they're doing the very same: they're doubting and disparage every research, which doesn't fit their way of thinking.


You say that mainstream science is "....doubting and disparage every research, which doesn't fit their way of thinking".

In fact, mainstream science is "doubts and disparages" research which doesn't fit the EVIDENCE. I.e. the evidence that EU community as a whole consistently fails to produce for their claims.

barakn
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 08, 2016
From newer researchers for example Czech researcher Ivana Charvatova brings more specific insights, one solar cycle is already named after her.

Solar cycles are numbered, not named, nor does your link contain any evidence that one was.
optical
Oct 09, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
vidyunmaya
not rated yet Oct 09, 2016
sub: Conference or a meeting at Konark temple
what drives Sun ? why not Science advance . upside-down logic is Dogma.
the Science in philosophy through Cosmology vedas interlinks help in time.
PLASMA VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-1993
THE VISION OF COSMIC UNIVERSE TO PREM UNIVERSE-1995
ESA proposals-SPACE VISION-OM-COSMOLOGICAL INDEX-2010
All books available at LULU.http://www.lulu.com/jnani108
Gigel
5 / 5 (2) Oct 10, 2016
The helical electric currents which power the Sun (and drive the 22 year cycle) provide the "path" with which the Sun travels.

How large are said currents (in Amperes)?
Any spectral line splitting produced by the attached electric fields has been observed yet?
Any bright spots at the entrance points of the currents into the Sun? I recall arcing produces bright spots on the electrodes.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Oct 10, 2016
The helical electric currents which power the Sun (and drive the 22 year cycle) provide the "path" with which the Sun travels.

How large are said currents (in Amperes)?
Any spectral line splitting produced by the attached electric fields has been observed yet?
Any bright spots at the entrance points of the currents into the Sun? I recall arcing produces bright spots on the electrodes.


You're seriously not expecting an answer to that, are you? They can't find the current, nor describe the EMF that keeps it going. When it was pointed out that the incoming current must at least equal the power of the Sun at any given distance (say 1 AU), it got shifted to a non-ecliptic path. Ulysses kind of buggered that up.
It was a reasonable idea, dreamed up at a time before we had measurements to show it wasn't happening. Anybody who still thinks it is viable is seriously lacking in a knowledge of astrophysics.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.