A Look at the Science behind the Warning… and at the Solar Physicist who says World Governments should forget about Global Warming for the time being, and think about a Mini Ice Age, instead… ‘We need to build greenhouses to grow our fruits and vegetables, otherwise we will not have them…’
Earlier this year, Diamond, of the Oppenheimer Ranch Project, organized an interview with astrophysicist, Professor Valentina Zharkova. Their discussion was intended to benefit laymen (like me… and you?), covering her ground-breaking work on solar activity, particularly her unexpected (for her) prediction, in 2015, of an immanent Grand Solar Minimum (starting in 2020).
She is delighted to explain her work to us…
The interview begins with Diamond drawing the Professor out on her impressive credentials, so as to set the record straight about the retraction, in 2019, of an article she had published in the scientific journal Nature… Diamond (who tells her his own background is in physics and geology) clearly intended to pass quickly on to his ‘real’ agenda, meaning the hard science questions, and (most dear to his heart) how solar activity affects earthquakes…
But– surprise, surprise! His offhanded question struck a chord with Professor Zharkova, provoking such an animated reaction that, to his credit, Diamond ‘let the current flow’. Thus, his guest had her unscripted say, with her host’s planned interview put ‘on hold’.
And thus are we also able to glimpse a little more of the personality of this fascinating lady who stands so squarely at the top rung of contemporary physicists (still a ‘Man’s World’), yet who remains not only down to Earth, with her feet on the ground, but always courteous and devoid of a swollen ego. She is not above speaking to laymen, but (let the envious beware!) she has proven her intransigence in standing up for her work, confident of the rigor of her methods, and despite her unpopularity with certain scientists who are unhappy when her results run so counter to theirs.
The Sun Never Set on Galileo (Professor Zharkova Can Attest…)
The Professor has caused a few earthquakes herself in the course of her career, since her independent research had already brought controversy with some U.K. (and other) colleagues, even before her predictions of a Grand Solar Minimum.
In her reply to Diamond’s wondering why she thought she had encountered such resistance from certain fellow scientists, her first answer is that she is a foreigner and an immigrant. The British, she says, have a deeply-held belief that only they can make important scientific discoveries (like Faraday, Maxwell and Kelvin…), and it is undeniable that British scientists were responsible for establishing the foundations of modern physics and mathematics…
But, besides this reason, it also turned out that there were errors in the work of her detractors. For example, the most vociferous, who was behind the scrubbing of her Nature article (already, at that time, her third Nature article), justified his retraction because in it she had written that variations of the Sun’s Baseline Magnetic Field can only occur when it moves closer to or farther from Earth… This particular editor at Nature, also a university professor, ‘corrected’ her, affirming, in the published retraction notice, that the distance between the Earth and the Sun does not change.
At this, a more than surprised Diamond points out that scientists have known for 70 years already, thanks to Milutin Milankovitch (the Serbian mathematician, geophysicist and astronomer), about perihelion and aphelion, so any claim that the distance between the Earth and the Sun does not change is manifestly ‘insane‘. Yet, the Professor says her complaint to Nature about the retraction was met by the publisher’s rebuff, which was justified by claiming the journal ‘does not comment’ on the actions of its editors!
Professor Zharkova also wrote to Edinburgh University to report the published scientific error (or, she wonders, could it have been a deliberately false scientific claim?) by that editor, who is also their professor of Celestial Mechanics. Whereupon the Vice Chancellor of the University replied to her that the professor in question is ‘entitled to his opinion’! But it is not his opinion, Professor Zharkova points out, it is his wishlist! (Do we hear groans from Galileo echoing out of the past?)
Despite the fact that Professor Zharkova patiently downloaded the ephemeris tables on the distances between the Sun and Earth from the official NASA site, publishing this information as part of a new article in Nature in 2021, yet, the incredible ‘opinion’ on which the 2019 retraction was based is (still!) publicly displayed on Nature‘s website, for all the world to see!
Professor Zharkova says that, as an immigrant to the U.K., and from a country (the Ukraine) that later collapsed, she feels she has been at a professional disadvantage in Scotland, where she settled. And she frankly admits that this has surprised and disappointed her… As a university professor and senior research scientist, she expected to be treated professionally by her British counterparts. Yet, for three years she was denied the security of a university teaching post, besides being labeled a Russian (which is, she says, to her as if she would claim to us that she immigrated to England, implying Scotland is part of England!) (The Scotts independence movement would have a fit!).
Such chauvinistic pressure (clearly intended to harass her and intimidate her into subservience) pushed her, instead, the Professor admits, into learning to stand up for herself… During those first years as an immigrant, when she was repeatedly refused a university post (at a time when she seriously needed a paycheck), she took a job as a Project Manager for her local City Council. And she was delighted to discover that, contrary to British academics, the Scotts people appreciated her intelligence and good work, and they sincerely encouraged her to advance her career (‘they were very supportive’, she says, finding her overqualified for her job with them, even while not realizing she had a PhD in astro physics, was simultaneously doing independent research, and, as well, had already published multiple times in Nature). Thus, the Council offered her communications training to help her improve her skills in English, as well as to learn how to make clearer explanations, how to negotiate, how to run effective meetings, and, especially useful, how to handle disruptive people. Through the Council, she even obtained a business degree in local government management…
At this same time, Professor Zharkova also came to realized how fortunate she was not to be teaching then at a university. That way, she not only felt free to investigate why certain of her colleagues hated her so much (her words), but also why they were trying so hard to silence her and diminish the results of her research through harassment and humiliation… Since she did not need to worry about losing a paycheck, she could speak out publicly about what she discovered, which was errors in calculations made by her adversaries in the high-energy physics of solar flares.
Being dedicated to instilling in her students the same respect for discipline and rigor that she acquired in her own education (in Applied Mathematics at Kiev University, with graduate and PhD work in Astro Physics, also in the Ukraine), the Professor was simply not prepared to find so many errors in the mathematical calculations of her U.K. colleagues. And she was also dismayed that U.K. universities ‘don’t teach proper knowledge’ (N.B.: U.S. universities might squirm at this observation, as well…). She has been constantly scolded, she says, by fellow professors who tell her that ‘the kids can’t memorize so much knowledge’, that she wants to teach too much knowledge!
All this finally came to a head in 1998 when she published her work on solar flares, including the discovery of ‘sunquakes’, which made international headlines (unusual for science news), and won her European Union funding to continue her research. And that was when she was at last offered a university teaching post, which she accepted first at Bradford University, then Northumbria (where she remains to this day), all the while continuing to win awards for her research.
In regard to the shocking attitudes of some of her fellow scientists, Professor Zharkova reflects that something clearly went wrong at this period… If they make mistakes, she says, they should admit it, but instead they ‘fooled the people for forty years and pretended everything was fine…’ Diamond (American) then shares his own negative experiences with fellow geologists, whenever he would give a presentation that went counter to ‘the accepted narrative’… And he applauds Professor Zharkova for relentlessly continuing to publish papers and move forward, despite the resistance. ‘Well, I didn’t have much choice,’ she replies, ‘because I needed to have a job, and besides, I knew I do good work… ‘ She also told Diamond that she is writing a book about this whole experience, in which she will share her deeper reflections on the reasons for what happened…
Tolerance, with certain scientists, they both agree, is at zero level…
What Governs Solar Activity ?
And with that, we come at last to the intended interview… (The Reader is advised that, for the layman, the math and science may, at certain points, go over our heads, but the gist of Professor Zharkova’s explanation is always clear… So, hang on, and give it a go. You will find that we can still appreciate complex science when explained by a true teacher with brilliant clarity…)
Diamond questions Professor Zharkova about the methods she used to determine solar dynamics, in particular, the use of eigenvectors in her mathematical calculations. Her data sets, he says, are not currently used in plasma physics or solar physics, but with them, and by factoring in eigenvectors, she has been able to create a model of ‘what is going on’. By this, he is referring to the process resulting from cyclic changes in the number of sunspots. Solar ‘cycles’ are based on recurring 11-year periods of sunspot activity, from one cycle of minimum sunspots through to maximum, then, in the following cycle, from maximum back to minimum again.
In reply, the Professor explains how, from her earlier work on high-energy particles, solar flares, and particle acceleration, she was able, with her EU funding, to move on to the detection of solar features, creating (with her three associates) several huge catalogs, as well as to using the Solar Activity Index (seen at timestamp 20:00, showing variations in the number of sunspots) to specifically detect and measure the magnetic fields of the spots.
At that time, it had already been determined that sunspots appear at both plus and minus 30 degrees latitude of the Sun, as illustrated in the ‘butterfly’ chart at timestamp 21:00. This chart shows daily sunspot areas averaged over individual solar cycles. The chart and accompanying graph represent 11-year cyclic activity from 1880 to 2010.
The electromagnetism of the sunspot fields, Professor Zharkova tells us, is a thousand times greater than that of the surrounding solar area. When analyzed (illustration at 21:50), we see that sunspots usually form in pairs, each pair having northern and southern ‘roots’, or poles, which are embedded in the surface of the Sun. Between these poles, electromagnetic ‘loops’ form and become more numerous as the cycle advances and the number of sunspots increases… Solar flares occur from the interference between these loops.
The magnetic fields of the loops slowly increase, along with the number of sunspots, from minimum to maximum, over a single, 11-year solar cycle, during which time the sunspot pairs (with their loops) migrate (due to the effects of solar rotation) to the Sun’s equator. At this point, the sunspot pairs (and loops) change hemispheres (illustration at 23:44), at which time the polarity of their magnetic fields is reversed. Then, a new cycle begins, with the number of sunspots, and their loops, slowly decreasing, until they return to a minimum again.
During migration, Professor Zharkova adds, because of the Sun’s brilliance, we actually see the sunspots, but not the loops (which are only visible in x-ray and UV emission). She shows a short video (at 25:00) to illustrate the increasing number of sunspots, with their loops, in migration to the Sun’s equator, then the reversal of polarity when the sunspots cross over the equator and move to occupy the opposite hemisphere, all the while slowly decreasing in number again. This process, over two consecutive solar cycles, constitutes the ‘solar dynamo’ governing solar activity. The Sun’s electromagnetic poles reverse every 11 years, returning to original polarity after two cycles, thus generating what resembles an electromagnetic ‘beat’…
By that time in solar research, the Professor observes, it had been determined that only some sunspots migrate to the Sun’s equator (from latitude 30 degrees in both northern and southern hemispheres), while others migrate to the nearest pole. A butterfly diagram had been drawn up by David Hathaway to illustrate this point (see timestamp 27:50). His work indicated to Professor Zharkova that sunspots actually derive their action from the background magnetic field of the Sun. In fact, sunspots appear from the deep interior of the Sun, and in places where the Background Magnetic Field allows them to appear, after which the Background Magnetic Field modulates their migration to either the Sun’s equator, or to the nearest pole.
With her associates (among them her son), Professor Zharkova used this observation, in 2008, to draw up a new proxy for the Solar Activity Index (28:55) based on the Solar Background Magnetic Field (top chart), as compared to the Index based on Sunspot Magnetic Fields (bottom chart).
Here, Diamond (geologist that he is) interjects that 90 percent of the biggest earthquakes (magnitude 8 or greater) occur at solar polar field reversals. The Professor, genuinely interested, observes that solar magnetic fields modulate volcanic irruptions, so it is likely that they modulate earthquakes as well, since magnetic field currents from the Sun to Earth create geomagnetic disturbances… And she adds that when the Sun is at maximum southern polarity, our North Pole is particularly affected…
The Professor ‘Keeps It Simple’
In any event, the Professor’s new proxy for the Solar Activity Index, published in a 2008 paper, showed that the Background Magnetic Field of the Sun governs solar activity because sunspots appear where the Background Magnetic Field allows them to appear. Having realized this, Professor Zharkova et al went on to determine the curve of the Sun’s Background Magnetic Field.
The Professor explains (40:00) that she used eigenvectors to find the direction of propagation of particular curves of sunlight when refracted into waves of different colors.
Realizing that she and her associates were seeking to define a complicated curve, the Professor reflected that ‘smart people’ use refracted white light to get electromagnetic color waves of different lengths. And while spectral analysis and Fourier analysis are good methods for analyzing stationary data, for the Sun’s dynamic data, she chose Principal Component Analysis instead.
First they broke the data down into component fields. Then, to determine the curve of the Sun’s Background Magnetic Field, they found the vector parallel to the matrix, and, finally, all the solutions parallel to that curve.
Hooray(!) for Human Intelligence
Once Professor Zharkova et al had determined the curve of the Sun’s Background Magnetic Field, they used eigenvectors to define its direction of propagation. All these calculations are very simple (she says) and do not require artificial intelligence. In fact, as she recounts, when she and her associates first tried to create an Automated Solar Activity Index, they found that this was impossible. The reason, she says, is that much of human intelligence cannot be quantified in numbers for artificial intelligence, so human intelligence is required to somehow unify the data… (And just how often are we told the contrary by the powers that presently be?)
Also, all waves are detected using eigenvalues and eigenvectors, which is, the Professor assures us, a very precise method… Artificial intelligence, she continues, has nothing to do with it, just basic mathematics, which anyone with A-level math (ie, freshman university-level) can do… For her students, she assures Diamond, it usually takes about half an hour (45:00). Thus, we can conclude that the ‘mundane’ steps in her method are within the reach of any competent scientist, and that Professor Zharkova’s brilliance is in her choice of and precision in applying those steps.
As an illustration, Professor Zharkova presents a linear homogeneous second-order differential equation with constant coefficients (used to describe waves)(see chart at 43:53). Diamond observes that this is graduate-level math, which, he admits, makes his head hurt! But, all who can and want to follow the steps in the solution, will find them starting at timestamp 38:40.
The data sets they used on solar activity, Professor Zharkova specifies, have been collected since 1976 by the Wilcox Solar Observatory (at Stanford University).
So, Diamond then asks, after you determined the math and crunched the numbers, what is it that was revealed?
But before looking at the results, Professor Zharkova tells him, let us first be aware of the rest of the steps in the process…
Using Principal Component Analysis (introduced by Karl Pearson in 1901; see 51:00), she and her team determined the variation in a set of multivariant data by first breaking it into uncorrelated variables. Once the correlated variables had been converted into uncorrelated separate entities (with a normalized delta), they were able to measure the magnetic field of each. Then, they found the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the solar magnetic fields from the covariance of the matrix, producing a scree plot (53:30) that shows eigenvalues versus variances. From this, they went on to find the eigenvectors (55:40), whereupon they discovered that, although most dynamo models are based on a single wave, in the Background Magnetic Field of the Sun, there are, in fact, two waves.
The conclusion they drew from this discovery was that, as there are two waves, there must be a double dynamo, not just one, and that each dynamo should work at a different layer.
With the resulting curve (57:00), they observed that the component waves are produced by dipole magnetic fields, and so can be quantified with analytical expressions. From this point, they were able to determine mathematical laws in operation which can be used, for the first time, to predict solar activity, since, up to then, no dynamo model had been fully functional beyond a single solar cycle. But by comparing their extended calculations of amplitude changes with known sunspot numbers (1:00:00), they were able to predict (in their paper published in 2015) solar cycles 24, 25, and 26 (1:00:38), then to verify their calculations by extending the comparison of their results with known solar activity from the year 1200 to the present. Their confidence in the accuracy of the laws they discovered, when correlated with past data, could then be extended to their calculations up to the year 3200.
What The 2000-Year Perspective Reveals…
The chart reflecting this work (at 1:02:21) is a summary exclusively derived (using eigenvalues and eigenvectors) from precise observations of the Sun’s Backgrounnd Magnetic Field, Professor Zharkova insists, and involves no assumptions, or artificial intelligence. And with the resulting 2000-year perspective shown in the chart, the Professor and her associates were able to discern a theretofore unknown cycle, this one extending over 350-400 years, and which is based on cyclic amplitudes of the 11-year solar cycles that astronomers have been observing for hundreds of years.
The critics were disarmed by her method, Professor Zharkova says, because they simply do not understand eigenvalues and eigenvectors. (N.B.: Besides which, echoing Diamond’s observation, their findings go against the politically-charged, ‘official’ narrative of our day… For another, also current example of this bias, see this story and this).
As it turns out, the Professor says, the waves of the double dynamo interfere with each other because they have different phases that are close, but not equal. This results in a modulation of the amplitudes and produces a ‘beating’ effect (see her video illustration at 1:03:41). The Professor observes, turning to analogy, that when an engineer comes to tune your piano or violin, he strikes a chord and listens for a beat. If there is one, he knows he must either increase or decrease the tension, to eliminate the beat and get a constant tone. But there is no engineer able to tune the Sun and eliminate the beat, so we just have to deal with its effects…
Diamond then asks about the severity of the Solar Minimum which Professor Zharkova’s 2000-year chart shows we have just entered (2020), as compared to the known ‘mini ice age’ of the Maunder Minimum (roughly 1645-1715, or about 70 years). She replies that whereas the Maunder Minimum lasted for six solar cycles, our present Minimum will only last for three (or 33 years, more or less).
The Professor goes on to speak about their hypothesized 2-layer dynamo model (chart at 1:07:30) and how their theory has since been substantiated by observations with HMI (Helioseismic and Magnetic Imagery)(1:08:10). From there, they produced a comparison of their double dynamo model with the observational wave curve (1:09:35), finding them to be amazingly similar.
And this is the point, Diamond adds, at which some of her fellow scientists got angry, which makes the Professor laugh. They were upset, she says, because ‘why should they come along, these bloody two women and two men?’ But they are happy to share, she adds, with those colleagues who are positive and interested in making constructive criticism… And indeed, discrepancies were pointed out in peer review, and subsequently corrected… But in addition to that, they once again got a lot of ‘nasty comments’, she says, while adding that, luckily, this time they had an editor (at a different scientific journal) who was smarter, and who allowed them to answer the comments and dismantle the accusations… However, the worst among their critics still did not ‘calm down’, maintaining that the Sun does not have a stable dynamo (or heartbeat), but rather an irregular one. To which they replied that if the Sun had an erratic dynamo, then, like an erratic heartbeat, it would explode in a few years, which everyone (in astro physics, at least) accepts is impossible. End of discussion!
So, Diamond asks, how does Professor Zharkova’s summary curve correlate to the known proxy data going back 800 years?
The Professor shows (at 1:12:49) the butterfly diagram she and her team made for the Maunder Minimum, so as to compare it to sunspots observed at various contemporary times. This led them to realize (as presented in a paper which is currently under review) that the observation of sunspots up to 1900 was ‘a huge mess’, shifting ‘max’ and ‘min’, with no standards set for observations, nor for the duration of cycles, some being 7 years, some 8, some 15. So, ‘definitely, observers did not pay attention at that time…’ And on top of that, the whole world then began changing, at different moments, from the Julien Calendar to the Gregorian. And as telescopes were not yet in general use, observers made drawings indicating local observation times that did not always specify the Calendar used, Julien or Gregorian.
Yet, the comparison of their summary curve with the Sunspot Index (1:13:15 and 1:15:15) showed them to be basically similar, except for the amplitudes. This is why (chart at 1:16:06) they were obliged to take into consideration the different amplitudes of poloidal versus toroidal magnetic fields. The amplitudes should be close at the middle, but quite different at both ‘wings’ of the cycle, which they confirmed by Wavelet Spectral Analysis (chart at 1:16:40).
Diamond then elicits the Professor’s confirmation that the Grand Solar Minimum Cycle revealed in her charts is 342 years (342-350) on average (for this particular 2000 years, she specifies) then asks how we refer to low periods of solar activity between the Grand Solar Minimum periods, for example, the Dalton Minimum (1800-1824). And she explains that the Dalton Minimum actually belongs to an 80/100-year cycle introduced by the second set of magnetic (quadruple/18 percent of variance) waves on the scree plot. She and her associates are not yet considering the full cycle, she says, but only the polar dipole magnetic field cycle… When you add quadruple waves, she says, you get additional minima cycles, which she and her team have not yet begun to consider. However, if one compares data from 1900 on, when observational criteria became generally consistent, the correlation of their calculations with observations is 67 percent (see chart at 1:19:12). And this is the maximum correlation with sunspot observations that one can expect from the data for dipole magnetic fields with 38 percent variance sorted by standard deviation.
Our Grand Solar Minimum
Professor Zharkova confi rms that the present Grand Solar Minimum will be among the shortest, at only three solar cycles (2020-2053, or solar cycles 25, 26 and 27). She mentions the work of Eddy (John Eddy, an American astronomer, after whom our present Minimum is usually named) who observed that solar irradiation deposited on Earth follows sunspot numbers (charts at 1:22:08 and 1:22:55). Solar irradiation increases when sunspot numbers increase… In the Maunder Minimum, solar irradiation dropped dramatically, by about 3 watts per square meter, and temperature dropped slightly, by about 1 degree, which is, she says, what we can expect in the present Minimum.
Next, she points to the work of Shindell et al in determining temperatures during and after the Maunder Minimum (see chart at 1:23:40), showing how Europe and North America went into a ‘deep freeze’. In 2001, in Science magazine, Shindell et al investigated the effects, during the Maunder Minimum, of a 1 degree drop in world temperature. They found decreased ozone (created by solar ultra violet light in the stratosphere), which in turn creates giant ‘wiggles’ in the Jet Streams (illustration at 1:25:07). We have, the Professor says, a similar picture actually happening now, at the beginning of the present Solar Minimum, with another 30 years still ahead of us! She expects the worst of our present Minimum to occur from 2035 to 2045, when we will be in cycle 26…
Diamond observes that the side effects of the Minimum are due to the Sun’s weakening magnetic field, while the Professor adds that they are also due to UV radiation which is important for the ozone layer in the Earth’s atmosphere. Diamond continues, saying that the ozone hole naturally occurs at Solar Minima because of more cosmic radiation coming in and, just as naturally, ‘heals’ itself when there is less. Plant growth, he says, is going to be affected… And the Professor agrees, adding that our World Governments should forget about Global Warming for the time being, and, for the next decade or two, think about this Mini Ice Age, instead. She is adamant that we need to build greenhouses to grow our fruits and vegetables, otherwise we will not have them. There is going to be snow and it will be cold!
Whereupon Diamond informs her that his organization builds geothermal greenhouses and teaches people to be self-sufficient for the times that are coming… Absolutely, Professor Zharkova replies. Well done! But Governments should also be thinking about this… To which Diamond answers, in irony, that the Governments love people like them. With equal irony, his guest agrees, ‘We know…’
To wrap up, Diamond says that their conversation has been amazing, but he would have liked to talk less about differential equations and more about the Sun’s connection to earthquakes. (This listener, however, is delighted to have assisted at the Professor’s presentation of her hard science…) Perhaps such a discussion could be for a future podcast? Professor Zharkova agrees and closes by showing a few photos that document the early days of our Grand Solar Minimum (see from 1:28:03 : Snow in July 2021 in the Carpathian Mountains, with mention of snow in the Arabian Desert, plus snow in the Southern Hemisphere in November 2022, as well as snow blizzards during 2 weeks in December 2022 and January 2023 in the USA and Canada). ‘When people tell you there is no winter anymore,’ the Professor says, ‘show them these pictures!’ And Diamond adds that there are record increases in the total snow mass over the last four years…
CONCLUSION
If our species managed to weather previous Solar Minima with little scientific understanding of what was happening, without forewarning, and with little or no technology to assist in the daily struggle for survival, compared to what we have at our disposal today, nor infrastructure (meaning the means of transporting and distributing essential goods), then certainly we, today, have more on our side than they did, to help us get through the hard times, just as they anyway managed to do.
But we should wonder at our leaders (rulers?), linked by technology that permits almost instantaneous communication of all the most pertinent, up-to-date intelligence, and with accumulated wealth and resources (never mind, for the moment, how they acquired these), yet who are not only busy with other preoccupations, but actively espousing a diametrically opposite weather ideology, instead of preparing ‘their’ people for this grave, looming challenge. So, informed individuals are stepping up to fill the gap, alerting those around them to what is coming, while putting thought and effort into strategies to help us all survive (thank you, Diamond, for being our ‘good neighbor’!).
And as long as our species can continue to produce individuals like Valentina Zharkova (with not only superior abilities in a critical domain which most people cannot even fathom, but who also possess the fortitude and courage of a saint when faced with opposition that would otherwise bury their knowledge), we can trust that this generation of Humanity will weather the present crisis in civilization, as well as the Grand Solar Minimum, just as other generations have done before us… As the Professor said, human intelligence is needed to somehow unify conflicting data and muddle through to a coherent solution… And more… Such resilience and independent initiative give us all every reason to trust that, truly, for Mankind, the future is shining as brightly as ever it has.