The increase or decrease is related to the Sun's cycle of magnetic activity, which reverses its polarity about every 11 years. That is such an insignificant time compared to the billions of years of its overall lifetime that to attribute any change in Solar activity to 'aging' is like comparing changes in someone's thought within a second to their overall lifetime.

In other words, the answer is False.

We are currently in 25th Solar cycle, the peak sunspot activity is expected in 2025 (record keeping began with Solar Cycle 1 in 1755).

Based on the prediction presented by Javaraiah, (2017) (Will Solar Cycles 25 and 26 Be Weaker than Cycle 24?. Sol Phys 292, 172 (2017)).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11207-017-1197-x

>>Begin quote

i) Solar Cycle 25 will be weaker than Cycle 24,

ii) Cycles 25 and 26 will have almost same strength, and the epochs of these cycles will be at the minimum between the current and upcoming Gleissberg cycles,

iii) Cycle 27 is expected to be stronger than Cycle 26 and weaker than Cycle 28,

iv) Cycle 29 is expected to be stronger than both Cycles 28 and 30, and

v) the maximum of Cycle 29 is expected to represent the next Gleissberg maximum.

Dear Nancy,

Many thanks for starting such an interesting discussion. I also concur with the arguments by Prof. Courtney Seligman.

Moreover, I want to add that astronomers identified several solar cycles, e.g.

•Schwabe 11 a

•Gleisberg 70-100 a

•Eddy 800-1200 a

•Bray-Hallstatt 2100-2500 a

Moreover, below are some papers dealing with the explanation and simulation of these oscillation of solar activity:

- A Model of a Tidally Synchronized Solar Dynamo (Sol Physics 294 (2019) 60)

- Solar Oscillations and the Orbital Invariant Inequalities of the Solar System(Solar Physics (2020)

- Complex planetary synchronisation structure of the solar system (Pattern Recognition Phys 2 (2014) 1)

- Is there a planetary influence on solar activity (Astronomy&Astrophysics A88 (2012) 548)

All the best,

Thomas

Courtney Seligman ,

I appreciate your use of the metaphorical comparison of increased solar flaring in the billions-of-years life of our sun to the impact of a thought in the life of the mind in a person's lifetime. Your point is well-taken that the current flurry of solar flare activities seems infinitesimal relative to the overall longevity of the sun.

However, when I now reread several passages in the referenced quote, at least one other bio-astronomical comparison comes to mind, for instance, that these flares may bear some close resemblance, not so much to thoughts arising in the mind, but more to pulsations of another body part, namely the heart. Along these lines, as well, moving from your intellectually pitched metaphorical comparison to the anatomical, physiological, or even medical domains, and taking a quantum leap to the domain of social sciences, might it not be conceivable that these solar flares are also comparable to a man's or a woman's or a child's emotional outbursts? Viewed in a linguistic perspective, the word "flare" seems to function like a pivot word that hinges solar flares to a psychologically based physiological humanoid phenomenon.

The scientific prediction that our sun will eventually mature into a red giant may further be analogized to a person whose blood pressure slowly, gradually, and incrementally rises. Viewed in terms of this scenario, the sun's attainment of Cycle 25 may be an indicator of solar aging, even if only on a miniscule scale relative to the magnitude of the solar energy, mass, and radiance.

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Janusz Pudykiewicz ,

Thank you for contributing detailed information about the Gleissberg Cycles to which the article cited in my question on solar flares refers. However, the Solar Physics 292, 172 (2017) data which you quote would appear to indicate that the prediction that Cycle 25 would be weaker than Cycle 24 turned out to be incorrect, if I have understood correctly. The scientific tracking of Gleissberg Cycles is totally new to me. A somewhat more recent article, Katie Peck, "The Sunspot Cycle Is More Intricate Than Previously Thought," Scientific American, August 1, 2018, is accessible at this LINK:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-sunspot-cycle-is-more-intricate-than-previously-thought/

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Preston Guynn ,

I greatly appreciate your historical perspective on Giovanni Domenico Cassini (1625-1712) (This is a familiar-sounding name; I seem to recall that Saturn's rings were named in his honor). He is credited with documenting sunspot activity, which led to discovery of the Maunder Minimum, and shortly thereafter, the less spectacular Dalton Minimum.1 The fact that the Dalton Minimum precedes the stunning and rather precipitous rise in sunspot activity during this first quarter of the twenty-first century would appear to indicate that the increase in solar flare activity, which, as you observe, is related to sunspot activity, may very well be correlated to the aging of our sun. In this case, the answer to my RG question is: true.

1See Figure 1 in Hiroko Miyahara et al., "Gradual onset of the Maunder Minimum revealed by high-precision carbon 14 analyses," Scientific Reports, 09 March 2021. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84830-5

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Thomas Jüstel ,

You are welcome! And thank you for the references to a number of different solar profile theories. The Bray-Hallstatt 2500-year solar cycle interests me the most, because it best serves to corroborate the 2021 article by Hiroko Miyahara et al. which I just referenced in my reply to Preston Guynn a few minutes ago. Figure 1 in that article does not seem to match Figure 1, which is referenced on page 2 in the following article: Leif Svalgaard, "Up to Nine Millennia of Multimessenger Solar Activity," https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1810/1810.11952.pdf

Figure 1 in the Svalgaard paper shows a gradual decline in sunspots during the first quarter of the twenty-first century. If there is, in fact, a correlation between solar flares and sunspots, then the articles you reference showing a fall in sunspot activities do not agree with the current observation of a rise in solar flare activity documented in this RG question's referenced article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2023/01/12/northern-lights-aurora-solar-flare/?fbclid=IwAR3xyVoKXaN-eANr7F1X5Qh_yNsmzCjpvFsXf-NA5u6bPNwovktZ3_xd3yo

Clarification is possibly needed concerning either the presence or the absence of any correlation between solar flares and sunspots.

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Dear Nancy, solar activity is a very complex phenomenon and epignosis or prediction of its long cycles is very unreliable. Even shorter cycles have not been sufficiently studied. This can be seen on the example of the forecast of the maximum of the current 25th cycle. Even the most modern methods of forecasting give very different amplitudes.For example, the neural network method gives the amplitude of the 25th cycle at the level of 57-91 units (Attia et al., 2013), and the attractor analysis - about 103 units. For comparison, it is worth recalling that in the previous 24th cycle, solar activity reached 116 units (in 2014). At the same time, the wavelet analysis predicts the height of the maximum of the 25th cycle at the level of 132 units (Rigozo et al., 2011), and the method of internal precursors – in range 154-202 units (Li et al., 2015). Thus, in general, the situation with the maximum of this cycle, which is expected in 2024-2026, remains unclear. However, the situation was exactly the same before, when the previous 24th cycle of solar activity was predicted. From the observed changes in solar activity, there are no signs of aging of our Sun. In theory, the Sun will begin to age only after 5 billion years, when it will enter the red giant stage. Sincerely, Vsevolod Lozitsky.

Vsevolod G. Lozitsky , thank you for emphasizing the sun's unpredictability, along with the fact that study of the sun is actually in early exploratory stages, from interior fusion to systemic and planetary analyses. I agree with your exemplary data indicating that forecasting is more of an art engaged by connoisseur scientists based on analysis of patterns spanning huge chunks of time. Another of your interesting observations that has for a long time intrigued me is that it will be five billion years before the sun, which is a main sequence star, will enter the red giant stage in its life. I have been wondering if this will be a sudden explosive event or a gradual evolutionary process. The following brief paragraph excerpted from a recent online article suggests that our sun may be small enough to fall under the sudden explosive event category. In other words, our sun will maintain its youthful appearance for five billion more years, and then all of a sudden it will explode into a red giant!

"Red giants' core temperatures, however, continue to rise as the core contracts further, eventually reaching levels where helium fuses to form carbon. (This is known as the "triple alpha process(opens in new tab)" because it involves three helium-4 isotopes, or alpha particles.) If the star is at least 2.2 times more massive than our sun, helium-to-carbon ignition is a relatively gradual process. But for less hefty stars, it occurs with an explosive flash."1

1 Nola Taylor Tillman, "Red giant stars: Facts, definition, and the future of the sun," space.com, January 21, 2022; bold face font added for emphasis. https://www.space.com/22471-red-giant-stars.html

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Dear Nancy, according to the standard model of the Sun, the Sun in the final stages of its evolution will experience relatively slow changes, without catastrophic explosions of the Nova or Supernova type. Unfortunately, these changes are still expected to be unfavorable for life on Earth. At the next stage of the red giant, the radius of the Sun and its luminosity will increase significantly, which will sharply increase the temperature on Earth. But this, in theory, should be in 5 billion years... That's a lot. For the earthly civilization, due to many problems of its development, significantly shorter periods of time, on the order of 50-100 years, can be critical... We can no longer live the way we live now. One of the illustrations for this is the work "Humanity" by the group "Scorpions", see link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG_lwCiPQ0I

May humanity have a better perspective!

Sincerely - Vsevolod Lozitsky.

Vsevolod G. Lozitsky ,

I certainly agree with your observation that, while the relatively small Sun will never behave like a Nova or Supernova and suddenly explode, its gradual attainment of the red dwarf stage, when, as you say, "the radius of the Sun and its luminosity will increase significantly, which will sharply increase the temperature on Earth" and "these changes are still expected to be unfavorable for life on Earth," the predicted 5 billion years seems to be giving humanity plenty of time to prepare. I also agree that "the way we live now" is detrimental to life on Earth to the point where more inhabitants are becoming aware of global humanity as a superpower capable of doing in a matter of centuries what it will take the Sun to do over a five billion year timespan. Now I am wondering whether or not this phenomenon of the Sun's evolution into a red dwarf has any connection to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, because the Sun is consuming a finite amount of hydrogen fuel, such that by the time it attains the white dwarf stage, it seems like its temperature will be considerably cooler.

Best regards,

Nancy Ann Watanabe

Dear colleagues, solar flares are sporadic phenomena (short-term and irregular) in solar atmosphere, more precisely in the chromosphere and corona. These are the layers of the Sun that are accessible to direct observation. As for the thermonuclear reaction of the synthesis of hydrogen into helium, it takes place in the core of the Sun, deep in the red-hot interior, which is inaccessible to direct observation. Only solar neutrinos, which fly out of the core, penetrate the entire Sun and are registered on Earth, allow us to state with certainty that a thermonuclear reaction is really taking place there. The thermonuclear reaction occurs due to the tunnel effect and occurs at the same level with very high accuracy, it does not affect solar flares, which have a completely different nature - the transformation of magnetic energy into other types of energy. Even if the number of solar flares increased over time, this would not lead to the cooling of the interior of the Sun and to a decrease in its luminosity. The energy released in the core of the Sun is many orders of magnitude greater than the energy of solar flares. The change in the number of solar flares over time indicates the different intensity of magnetic field generation in the convective zone of the Sun, and not the intensity of the thermonuclear reaction in the Sun's core. Sincerely, V.L.