Добрый день, Юрий Иванович!

Я думаю, Юрий Иванович, что ответы на весьма актуальные вопросы, поставленные Вами, органично связаны с проблемой природы 11-летней цикличности Солнца (и механизма ее сбоя).

Возможный ответ на 1-й вопрос

Обнаруженное по галактическим космическим лучам аномальное увеличение площади солнечного цикла 23 явилось предвестником сбоя 11-летней цикличности (http://www.forshock.ru/predvlong.html ): в соответствии с гипотезой автора об инварианте 22-летнего цикла, вслед за увеличением площади 23 цикла последовало уменьшение площади (энергоемкости) следующего 24 цикла.

Уменьшение энергоемкости сопровождается уменьшением(относительной вариации) светимости Солнца, которая в 24-цикле уменьшилась, практически, вдвое: (http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant ).

В данном представлении и возникновение и нарушения цикличности органично связаны между собой общностью подхода к цикличности как механизм регуляции энергии в конвективной зоне Солнца, стабилизирующий его температуру /1-2/.

Важно заметить, что реализация на Солнце нетривиального нелинейного режима («самоорганизованной критичности»), когда весьма нерегулярно, т.е. катастрофически стравливается избыток запасенной в системе энергии, лишает физических оснований идеологию «линейной суперпозиции» волн (с периодами 11 и 200 лет) применительно к физике Солнца. В этом случае, становится очевидной причина запаздывания на полвека (!) неординарного сбоя в цикличности Солнца, прогноз которого сторонниками идеологии «линейной суперпозиции» был дан на середину 21 века. В реальности же, неординарный сбой 11-летней цикличности начался с 23 цикла, т.е. уже случился, притом, в начале 21 века, в том числе, в соответствии с прогнозом (http://www.forshock.ru/docs/docsrus8.html), данным по космическим лучам в 2006 г.

Возможный ответ на 2-й вопрос

В случае реализации сценария глобального сбоя 11-летней цикличности в 25 цикле следует ожидать повышенный уровень радиационного фона, подобно тому, что регистрировалось уже дважды: в минимуме с 23 на 24 цикл (2007-2010) и с 24 на 25 цикл (2018-2020), но уже в течение всего 25 цикла!? В свою очередь, увеличение интенсивности ГКЛ способствует, как известно, усилению процесса облако-образования, интенсификации конвективных процессов в атмосфере, увеличению количества осадков и, как возможное следствие - понижению температуры в планетарном масштабе. В этом состоит альтернатива процессу глобального потепления, но все это будет иметь существенное значение лишь в случае глобального сбоя 11-летней цикличности, т.е. нарушения инварианта 22-летнего цикла.

………………………………………………………………………………………….

1. Козлов Валерий, «Косм. исслед.» 2021. №2.

2. Козлов Валерий & Козлов Вячеслав. «Геом. и аэрон.». 2011. Т. 51. №2.

Спасибо за ценный комментарий.

Юрий

In Eglish please !!!!

My answer to Y.I. Ermolaev (in English) !

Good afternoon, Yuri Ivanovich!

I think, Yuri Ivanovich, that the answers to the very topical questions posed by you are organically connected with the problem of the nature of the 11-year cyclicity of the Sun (and the mechanism of its failure).

Possible answer to the 1st question

The anomalous increase in the area of ​​solar cycle 23 detected us by galactic cosmic rays was as a harbinger of a failure of the 11-year cyclicity (http://www.forshock.ru/eng/predvlong.html): in accordance with the author's hypothesis about the invariant of the 22-year cycle, an increase in the area of the 23rd cycle was followed by a decrease in the area (energy intensity) of the next 24th cycle.

A decrease in energy intensity is accompanied by a decrease (relative variation) in the luminosity of the Sun, which in the 24th cycle has almost halved: (http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant).

In this view, both the occurrence and violation of cyclicity are organically linked by the generality of the approach to cyclicity as a mechanism for autoregulating energy in the convective zone of the Sun, i.e. stabilizing its temperature / 1-2 /.

It is important to note that the realization on the Sun of a nontrivial nonlinear regime (“self-organized criticality”), when is quite irregular, i.e. catastrophically, is vented excess energy stored in the system, depriving of the physical foundations of the ideology of “linear superposition” of waves (with periods of 11 and 200 years) as applied to the physics of the Sun. In this case, the reason for the half-century (!) delay of the non-ordinary failure in the cyclicity of the Sun becomes obvious, the forecast of which was given by the supporters of the ideology of "linear superposition" on the middle of the 21st century. In reality, however, the extraordinary failure of the 11-year cyclicity began with the 23rd cycle, i.e. has already happened, moreover, at the beginning of the 21st century, including, in accordance with the forecast, by data cosmic rays in 2006: http://www.forshock.ru/eng/docs.html

Possible answer to the 2nd question

If the scenario of a global failure of an 11-year cyclicity is realized in the 25th cycle, an increased level of radiation background should be expected, similar to what was already recorded twice: at a minimum from 23 to 24 cycles (2007-2010) and with 24 to 25 cycles (2018-2020 ), but already during the entire 25th cycle !? In turn, an increase in the GCR intensity contributes, as is known, to an intensification of the cloud formation process, an intensification of convective processes in the atmosphere, an increase in precipitation and, as a possible consequence, a decrease in temperature on a planetary scale. This is an alternative to the process of global warming, but all this will be of significant importance only in the event of a global failure of the 11-year cyclicity, i.e. violation of the invariant of the 22-year cycle.

……………………………………………………………………………………….

1. Kozlov Valery, “Cosm. Research" 2021. Vol. 59. No. 2.

2. Kozlov Valery & Kozlov Vyacheslav. "Geom. and Aeronom. " 2011. Vol. 51. No. 2.

Valery,

I would like to ask a couple of clarifying questions after your comments.

1. If I understood correctly, according to observations of galactic cosmic rays, the violation of the usual solar cycle occurred in 2006. According to observations of both the Sun and the solar wind, the weakening occurred several years earlier. How is the lag of the effect in galactic cosmic rays explained in comparison with the effects on the Sun and in the solar wind? This delay exceeds the time of propagation of the solar wind from the Sun to the outer boundary of the heliosphere (about 1 year).

2. As I understand it, the following chain of events is being considered: (1) a weakening of solar activity leads to a weakening of the solar wind, (2) it leads to an increase in GCR, (3) it leads to an increase in cloudiness on the Earth, (4) it leads to an increase in albedo, (5) this leads to a decrease in the heat flux to the Earth's surface and a decrease in its temperature. Right? Can you provide articles that describe this chain of events? What other processes does GCR affect?

Happy New Year!

Yuri

Your question, Yuri Ivanovich, as they say, "in the top ten"!

Regarding the 1st question

In the first work from 2006 (Kozlov, Markov, 2007, see attachment file), the moment of change in the duration of solar cycle No. 22 fell on 1990! The location of the change in the PERIOD of the 11-year variation is shown by the vertical arrow (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 2)!

To analyze the dynamics of the period of 11-year variation in time, the method of wavelet analysis was used.

In this case, the "Scintillation Index" of the intensity of galactic cosmic rays was used, based on the formalization of the "three-dimensional" dynamic spectrum: amplitude-time-frequency. In fact, the values ​​of the GCR scintillation index in time are the behavior of the "indicator" of the amplitude-frequency spectrum of the GCR fluctuations in time.

The importance of the results obtained required independent verification. As a result, the GCR fluctuation parameter was introduced, based on taking into account the "long tails" of the generalized Weibull-Gnedenko distribution function (3-parameter, in the general case). Such a probabilistic formalization of the "fine structure" in the form of correlated "beams" of galactic cosmic ray particles in the interplanetary medium made it possible to quantitatively describe the dynamics of high-energy particles in transient solar wind regimes. The dynamics of fluctuations of the GCR intensity was able to be "split" into two types: precursors and diagnostics (of a predicted event), moreover, in the language of probabilities!

The revealed fractality (self-similarity) of the structure of transient solar wind regimes made it possible to work with three modes: operative (averaging over 12 hours), medium-term (averaging over 27 days), and long-term (annual averaging).

With the annual averaging of the GCR fluctuation parameter, it became possible to use the analytical signal method, in which it became possible to correctly estimate the area swept under the curves of the last 4 cycles (Fig. 3). And now, according to the assessment of the areas of the phase portraits of these 11-year cycles, it was established that while the invariant is still valid ("the line of the invariant, in Fig. 4): 21 and 22 cycles are within the specified" line of the invariant ". At the same time, the excess of the "invariant line" by the 23rd cycle is "compensated" by the decrease in the 24th cycle (which is confirmed by the fall, almost twice, by the relative variation of the luminosity of the Sun according to satellite observations).

Thus, the dynamics of the "phase portraits" of 11-year cycles make it possible so far (that is, at the present time) to speak about the very possibility of invariance, which is very important. In addition, from the analysis of the trajectory of the phase portrait of the 23rd cycle, it can be concluded that a noticeable increase in the area (energy intensity of the cycle) occurs since 2006, and a noticeable decrease in the energy intensity of the 24th cycle is recorded in 2012.

It follows that the beginning of the change in the duration of the 11-year cycle (No. 22) is recorded in 1990 (according to the results of wavelet analysis), and the beginning of the change in the energy intensity of the 11-year cycle (No. 23) is recorded in 2006.

What does this mean, from the point of view of the variability of the solar wind parameters, it is still worth figuring out !? For the beginning of such work, we have 2 reference dates: 1990 and 2006.

Regarding the 2nd question,

Yuri Ivanovich, I can only refer to one of the first (known to me) works of the Academician of the Russian Academyof Sciences, Hermogen Filippovich Krymsky:

Krymsky G.F. Cosmic rays and near-earth space // Solnechno-earthly physics. SB RAS. Irkutsk. Issue 2 (115). P. 42-45. 2002.

Valery,

Thank you for interesting infrmation.

One consequence is very high galactic cosmic ray intensities. Their transport coefficients depend on the very parameters that are behaving very differently (see attached for a modulation study from 2018 demonstrating this, and making predictions that are not too far off)