Michio Kaku, and 2012 bull crap

[Peron]

http://www.theusreport.com/the-us-report/dr-michio-kakuthe-physicist-who-should-have-a-tv-show.html

 

You know I use to liek this guy, but what the hell is this.

 

Kaku renders a very complicated subject interesting and understandable for those of us challenged by quantum mechanics and relativity. Kaku talked about the solar cycle on Fox News on Thursday. “We made a mistake,” he said, speaking about industry calculations about solar flares. Kaku believes the cycle will peak around 2012, possibly playing havoc with Earthling gadgets like Blackberries.

 

NASA agrees, predicting the next solar maximum should be a “doozy.” Some experts like Kaku project Solar Max for 2012. But 2 years ago, others predicted it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011.

[iNow]

I'm not sure I understand why you're admonishing him. Can you elaborate? It seems to me that he's saying it's possible we were wrong with previous predictions, that solar flare activity could peak in 2012, and if that happens it will have a real effect on electronics here on earth.

 

Doesn't seem to have anything whatsoever to do with the Mayan calender nonsense.

 

What do you suppose I am missing?

[Mr Skeptic]

It's not like just because a bunch of nutjobs think the world will end in 2012, that nature will retaliate by not allowing anything bad to happen in that year.

[mooeypoo]

It's also not new. We knew that around 2012 there's going to be another solar maximum (we have those every century or so). The main difference, though, is that last time - a century and a half or so ago - we didn't have satellites and other electronics that actually ARE susceptible for such damages.

 

The higher radiation will not harm human beings or life. It might harm electronics, specially in space. NASA knew this for a while, it's planning. Satellite companies knew this for a while, I'm sure they planned. We will most likely have a few shortages and planned power cut-offs to prevent damage.

 

All Kaku is saying is that we might've had our calculations wrong and the peak will be higher than expected.

 

We're not talking about "OMG LIFE ON EARTH ABOLISHED!" higher, we're talking about electronics-damage higher.

 

It's not new. And it's definitely not Mayan.

 

~moo

[Peron]

How do they predict a solar maximum? I dont think you can. The sun a huge fusion ball of plasma, chaos controls the surface and the inner structure of the sun.

[insane_alien]

actually the cycles of the sun are pretty predictable. it goes through many regular cycles of activity.

 

its kind of like saying a clock is unpredictable because the electrons in the material move chaotically.

[ydoaPs]

I thought he was upset about this part: "Kaku talked about the solar cycle on Fox News on Thursday."

[Peron]

I must have misunderstood where Mr Kaku was coming from. Thank you for clearing things up for me.

[D H]

Kaku is just reiterating the predictions by NASA. See http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml.

 

This upcoming solar cycle is turning out to be rather different from what we have seen over the last several decades. NASA's predictions have been updated several times, pushing the peak down and forward in time. The Sun's behavior appears to have changed. Rather than repeating the cycles of the last 50 years it is behaving like it did 100 years ago. Some legitimate solar scientists are questioning whether we are at the onset of another Dalton minimum (~200 years ago), or even a Maunder minimum (~350 years ago).

[JohnB]

I must admit, I have doubts about the next maximum being a "doozy" in 2012.

 

The cycle has been so slow to start that it would have to ramp up in a very spectacular manner over the next 2 years to even make "normal" on time.

[D H]

The article cited in the original post is a blog page. The reports of solar cycle 24 being a doozy was old by the time the article was written. Here is a 2006 story from NASA predicting that "the next solar cycle is going to be a big one." http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm

 

By the time the article was written the predicted peak had been moved back to 2011 or 2012, and much reduced in intensity from the early predictions. The prediction has been downgraded multiple times. It looks like the current prediction might be in need of yet another update. There was a brief flurry of activity a couple weeks ago, but the Sun is once quite quiet.

[D H]

The latest prediction (November 2, 2009) from the Solar Physics Group at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is for a weak cycle 24 (78 ± 18 sunspot count at solar max), with solar max in April or May 2013.

 

The Sun has started to show signs of activity in the last month. With this slight uptick, the spotless count for 2009 will probably be just a bit less than the count for 2008. This corresponds well with a minimum in December 2008, and that in turn corresponds well with a max in early to mid 2013. We shall see ...

[JohnB]

DH, from what I've read it would seem that the only thing we can truly say about the Suns cycles is that we don't know as much about them as we thought we did.

 

I've read in some reports that some small sunspots are either very, very late cycle 23 or that they are very early cycle 25. It appears that cycle 24 might still be a bit of a no show.

 

As you said, we shall see........

[D H]

I've read in some reports that some small sunspots are either very, very late cycle 23 or that they are very early cycle 25. It appears that cycle 24 might still be a bit of a no show.

Those reports are based on the mistaken assumption that just because recently observed sunspot #1030 had the opposite-than-expected polarity meant that it is a solar cycle 23 (or 25) sunspot. Sunspots of the opposite polarity do occur, and they do not necessarily mean they are a member of some other cycle.

[JohnB]

Sunspots of the opposite polarity do occur, and they do not necessarily mean they are a member of some other cycle.

Okay, thanks. I didn't realise that. I was under the impression that polarity = cycle.

 

There's always something new to learn, isn't there?