Quote:
|
The component in the N-S direction is reduced by a factor of 10 because the gas giants orbits are inclined by about 6 degrees to the solar equator. Here comes some maths :-) sin(6 degrees) = 0.10 near enough. That means that the N-S motion of the core would be quite substantial, but ...
|
rtomes, the force is not only working on the core, it is working on the
whole Sun. So it would be lifted by Jupiter in it entirety. Why would only the core be influenced?
I am impressed by your math, thank you.
Quote:
|
This is not my problem, but a problem in Solar theory.
|
Sorry, but you bring up this ATM stuff, so it is REALLY your problem.
Quote:
|
Finally, you can multiply the COM movements in the N-S direction after multiplying by 0.10 by this rather uncertain proportion to get the motion of the Solar interior.
|
HUH? multiply the movements? I thought that motion was a vector quantity, so you should add them up to start with. And once again, the force works on the whole sun not just the interior.
Quote:
Certainly. Existing models of the Sun do not incorporate this effect and assume thatb there is no convection below a certain depth. I did note that since I first proposed this it has been discovered that the actual convection depth is deeper than expected as I would have expected.Of course this convection must be incorporated into the existing models because it
affects heat flow and there will be feedbacks.
|
You keep on forgetting,
rtomes that the convection region is
THE region for you to work on, because that is where the magnetic field is generated, NOT in the core. Read up on dynamo theory. Sunspots are related to the magnetic field.
Quote:
|
If you denigrate correlations then you denigrate science. That is all science is.
|
I do not denigrate correlations, I use cross correlations all the time in my job. But correlation is not causation!!!!!!!!!! No matter how high the regression coefficient is, only when you have a model/process that would explain the correlation do you have something handfast. You can find numerous correlations on the internet that map e.g. the selling of red cars to the phase of the moon, or whatever.
Quote:
|
Jupiter remains above and below the solar equator for 6 years at a time. Its 11.86 year orbital cycle does show up in the sunspot cycle Fourier analysis along with other periods.
|
Yeah, but over those six years it will have an increasing angle from zero to maximum to zero again. Integrating this to get an average I think, if I am correct from the top of my head, this will decrease your effect by a factor 1/3 (but please check it for yourself).
And I know you like Fourier, but only on average is the sunspot cycle 11 years, how does your Jupiter pulling handle that? You certainly will be in trouble mapping the Maunder minimum (or did the planets suddenly have no influence on the Sun at that period?) etc. etc.
Quote:
|
That puny Jupiter force is sufficient to cause a motion of several kilometers in the solar core over a siz year period. However the calculation depends on the correct relativistic mass content of the Sun which is not known very accurately. If you tell me what that is accurately I will tell the accurate answer.
|
Yes, those are the tidal forces workin on the sun as a whole. I am not sure about the amplitude, I found a quote from an
Icarus paper (J. Meeus, Icarus 26, 257-267, 1975) that the amplitude was millimeters. The paper basically debunks the book "the Jupiter effect" of which this thread is only a part of the that book. Unfortunately, I do not have the pdf at the moment.
And
here is another paper showing no influence on solar activity from the planets.
Unfortunately, I cannot find a direct (visible) reference to the amplitude of the tide on the Sun created by Jupiter.
I do not see why I should do the work for you, define your "relativistic mass" yourself.
so in the end: words words words.
wake me up when you have a real mathematical model Ray, till then, see you later.