      # Explanation For The 11-Year Value Of Solar Activity

solar activity

5 replies to this topic

### #1 Hamster

Hamster

Curious

• • Members
• • 7 posts

Posted 08 June 2019 - 12:41 PM

Hello, all.

The proposed method, explaining the 11-year solar cycle, is based on an unusual theory, according to which some fundamental physical constants, including the speed of light in vacuum c, which we consider universal for the entire Universe, have different values in the spheres of influence of other stars, planets or space objects. Analyzing this theory, I assumed that for any two space objects that have gravitational attraction and revolve around their power centers in accordance with Kepler's laws, their speeds of light c1 and c2, and gravitational parameters µ1 and µ2 are interconnected by the following relationship:

According to this relationship, the speed of light in vacuum for the Sun can be calculated by the following formula:

where c = 299792458 m/s is the speed of light in vacuum for the Earth, µS ≈ 1.3271∙1020 m3/sis the gravitational parameter of the Sun, µE  3.9860∙1014 m3/s2 is the gravitational parameter of the Earth (the geocentric gravitational constant).

Since the Sun, without doubt, is a powerful source of electromagnetic radiation (and light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum), it is logical to assume that this radiation can be directed to the center of our galaxy (the Milky Way). If we assume that the solar electromagnetic radiation has a pulsating character due to discrete movement of the Sun along its galactic orbit, and if we assume that the Galaxy's core is capable of reflecting electromagnetic waves, then, knowing the distance from the Sun to the Galaxy's center aS ≈ 2.4976∙1020 m, and knowing the speed of light cfor the Sun, calculated by the formula (2), we can approximately calculate the time of movement TS of a solar electromagnetic wave to the Galaxy's center and back. Schematically, such a movement may be represented as follows:

The resulting value – 11 years – almost coincides with the average period of observed solar activity that allows us to confidently determine its cause: the 11-year solar cycle is determined by the time of movement of the solar electromagnetic wave reflected from the Galaxy's core and returned back to the Sun.

Of course, the formula (3), derived by me, is approximate. Since the real movement of the Sun around the galactic center occurs probably along a complicated elliptical trajectory; the orbital speed of the Sun is not constant; various obstacles can be present, appear and disappear on the path of the solar electromagnetic wave in the interstellar space, consequently the period of solar activity cannot be constant in time and constant in intensity. This probably explains the maximums and minimums of solar activity, calculated and observed in past historical periods

In addition, I managed to get another approximate method for calculating the 11-year solar activity cycle. Initially, I empirically derived the curious formula that may be indirect evidence of the connection between the microworld and the macroworld. This formula connects (with a small uncertainty) the ratio of the gravitational parameters of the Sun and the Earth (µSµE) and the mass ratio of the electron to the proton (memp) with the “golden” number φ = (1+√5)/2 ≈ 1.618 :

Accordingly, solving the system of the equations (3) and (4), we can approximately calculate the 11-year cycle of solar activity by the following formula:

where aS ≈ 2.4976∙1020 m is the distance from the Sun to the Galaxy's center.

It is still difficult to say whether it is possible to use the proposed methods to calculate the activity cycles of other stars, planets or space objects. If these methods are correct, then using the relationship (1) – which, according to the theory under consideration, is universal – and knowing the speed of light c for the Earth, the geocentric constant µE, the semi-major axis aO and the gravitational parameter µO of the space object that interests us, we could calculate its speed of light and its period (frequency) of orbital electromagnetic radiation by the formulas:

For example, for Jupiter, which has a powerful magnetic field, the calculation using these formulas gives the following values: the speed of light cJ = 1.3962∙1010 m/s ; the period of orbital electromagnetic radiation (relative to the Sun) TJ = 111.53 seconds ; the frequency fJ = 0.009 Hz. An experimental detection of electromagnetic radiation with such a period (frequency) in the Solar system could be an important evidence of the validity of both the method described in this work, which explains the 11-year cycle of solar activity, and the theory, which asserts that some fundamental physical constants have different values in other worlds, which, in turn, can open up new opportunities for us to further explore nature.

Thanks.

### #2 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

• • Members
•       • 2480 posts

Posted 08 June 2019 - 02:47 PM

Hello, all.

The proposed method, explaining the 11-year solar cycle, is based on an unusual theory, according to which some fundamental physical constants, including the speed of light in vacuum c, which we consider universal for the entire Universe, have different values in the spheres of influence of other stars, planets or space objects. Analyzing this theory, I assumed that for any two space objects that have gravitational attraction and revolve around their power centers in accordance with Kepler's laws, their speeds of light c1 and c2, and gravitational parameters µ1 and µ2 are interconnected by the following relationship: formula26-7.GIF   (1)

According to this relationship, the speed of light in vacuum for the Sun can be calculated by the following formula: formula26-8.GIF   (2)

where c = 299792458 m/s is the speed of light in vacuum for the Earth, µS ≈ 1.3271∙1020 m3/sis the gravitational parameter of the Sun, µE  3.9860∙1014 m3/s2 is the gravitational parameter of the Earth (the geocentric gravitational constant).

Since the Sun, without doubt, is a powerful source of electromagnetic radiation (and light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum), it is logical to assume that this radiation can be directed to the center of our galaxy (the Milky Way). If we assume that the solar electromagnetic radiation has a pulsating character due to discrete movement of the Sun along its galactic orbit, and if we assume that the Galaxy's core is capable of reflecting electromagnetic waves, then, knowing the distance from the Sun to the Galaxy's center aS ≈ 2.4976∙1020 m, and knowing the speed of light cfor the Sun, calculated by the formula (2), we can approximately calculate the time of movement TS of a solar electromagnetic wave to the Galaxy's center and back. Schematically, such a movement may be represented as follows: sact.GIF formula26-9.GIF   (3)

The resulting value – 11 years – almost coincides with the average period of observed solar activity that allows us to confidently determine its cause: the 11-year solar cycle is determined by the time of movement of the solar electromagnetic wave reflected from the Galaxy's core and returned back to the Sun.

Of course, the formula (3), derived by me, is approximate. Since the real movement of the Sun around the galactic center occurs probably along a complicated elliptical trajectory; the orbital speed of the Sun is not constant; various obstacles can be present, appear and disappear on the path of the solar electromagnetic wave in the interstellar space, consequently the period of solar activity cannot be constant in time and constant in intensity. This probably explains the maximums and minimums of solar activity, calculated and observed in past historical periods

In addition, I managed to get another approximate method for calculating the 11-year solar activity cycle. Initially, I empirically derived the curious formula that may be indirect evidence of the connection between the microworld and the macroworld. This formula connects (with a small uncertainty) the ratio of the gravitational parameters of the Sun and the Earth (µSµE) and the mass ratio of the electron to the proton (memp) with the “golden” number φ = (1+√5)/2 ≈ 1.618 : formula26-10.GIF   (4)

Accordingly, solving the system of the equations (3) and (4), we can approximately calculate the 11-year cycle of solar activity by the following formula: formula26-11.GIF   (5)

where aS ≈ 2.4976∙1020 m is the distance from the Sun to the Galaxy's center.

It is still difficult to say whether it is possible to use the proposed methods to calculate the activity cycles of other stars, planets or space objects. If these methods are correct, then using the relationship (1) – which, according to the theory under consideration, is universal – and knowing the speed of light c for the Earth, the geocentric constant µE, the semi-major axis aO and the gravitational parameter µO of the space object that interests us, we could calculate its speed of light and its period (frequency) of orbital electromagnetic radiation by the formulas: formula26-12.GIF   (6)

For example, for Jupiter, which has a powerful magnetic field, the calculation using these formulas gives the following values: the speed of light cJ = 1.3962∙1010 m/s ; the period of orbital electromagnetic radiation (relative to the Sun) TJ = 111.53 seconds ; the frequency fJ = 0.009 Hz. An experimental detection of electromagnetic radiation with such a period (frequency) in the Solar system could be an important evidence of the validity of both the method described in this work, which explains the 11-year cycle of solar activity, and the theory, which asserts that some fundamental physical constants have different values in other worlds, which, in turn, can open up new opportunities for us to further explore nature.

Thanks.

While this is entertaining I thought it was due to the fusion cycle rate the differences in electromagnetic radiation from stars, when the Fusion Cycle increases it causes more electromagnetic radiation to be emitted from the sun and when the fusion cycle decreases in reaction rate less electromagnetic radiation is emitted, while this formula may indeed predict the movement of electromagnetic radiation from the sun to the galaxy that could also be done via C*dt = dx , I would not say there is any connection between the solar cycle and electromagnetic radiation reflection, you would need more proof that electromagnetic radiation reflection does indeed cause the solar cycle more than a equation such as experimental proof of such an event, but it is still a creative idea, but until there is more proof of this phenomenon this is speculation that it causes the solar cycle while reflected energy from the galactic core could account for increased temperature of the solar core and increased fusion rate, you would need something more solid then a time table.

I think that a calculation that may need to be added is the exact amount of Electromagnetic radiation that is reflected during the 11 period cycle over time along with the exact amount of temperature effect that the reflected radiation would have on a star over time which makes a fusion rate change in the star relating to the cycle, which would be your proof that indeed reflected electromagnetic radiation causes changes in the solar cycle. Secondly, you would need data that shows that this is accurate to the real solar cycle data showing your predicted increases in solar temperature via electromagnetic radiation reflection versus actual solar data of the solar temperature over time and if they are equal only then can this be considered to be accurate to reality.

Edited by VictorMedvil, 08 June 2019 - 03:11 PM.

### #3 Hamster

Hamster

Curious

• • Members
• • 7 posts

Posted 08 June 2019 - 03:00 PM

While this is entertaining I thought it was due to the fusion cycle rate the differences in electromagnetic radiation from stars, when the Fusion Cycle increases it causes more electromagnetic radiation to be emitted from the sun and when the fusion cycle decreases in reaction rate less electromagnetic radiation is emitted, while this formula may indeed predict the movement of electromagnetic radiation from the sun to the galaxy that could also be done via C*dt = dx , I would not say there is any connection between the solar cycle and electromagnetic radiation reflection, you would need more proof that electromagnetic radiation reflection does indeed cause the solar cycle more than a equation such as experimental proof of such an event, but it is still a creative idea, but until there is more proof of this phenomenon this is speculation that it causes the solar cycle while reflected energy from the galactic core could account for increased temperature of the solar core and increased fusion rate, you would need something more solid then a time table.

I agree. That is why the use of these formulas, for example, to calculate the Cepheid variables could prove or disprove the proposed method.

Edited by Hamster, 08 June 2019 - 03:01 PM.

### #4 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

• • Members
•       • 2480 posts

Posted 08 June 2019 - 03:15 PM

I agree. That is why the use of these formulas, for example, to calculate the Cepheid variables could prove or disprove the proposed method.

In any case, if you read everything including the edit, you understand that this isn't enough to make this a theory just a hypothesis and that there is much more work you have to do.

Edited by VictorMedvil, 08 June 2019 - 03:25 PM.

### #5 Hamster

Hamster

Curious

• • Members
• • 7 posts

Posted 14 June 2019 - 07:44 AM

I think that a calculation that may need to be added is the exact amount of Electromagnetic radiation that is reflected during the 11 period cycle over time along with the exact amount of temperature effect that the reflected radiation would have on a star over time which makes a fusion rate change in the star relating to the cycle, which would be your proof that indeed reflected electromagnetic radiation causes changes in the solar cycle. Secondly, you would need data that shows that this is accurate to the real solar cycle data showing your predicted increases in solar temperature via electromagnetic radiation reflection versus actual solar data of the solar temperature over time and if they are equal only then can this be considered to be accurate to reality.

This is a difficult task even for professional astronomers, which I am not. After all, it is necessary to take into account unpredictable obstacles in the interstellar medium, especially in dust clouds, hiding the center of the Galaxy, which affect the intensity of the solar electromagnetic wave that synchronizes the physicochemical processes inside the Sun. And all this happens with huge 11-year intervals of time. It is very difficult task. Nevertheless, I am sure that the 11-year synchronization of the solar cycle with the solar electromagnetic wave is proved. It is very exact coincidence + amazing connection with the "golden" number. I do not believe in such an accident.

### #6 Dubbelosix

Dubbelosix

Creating

• • Members
•       • 3495 posts

Posted 21 June 2019 - 01:38 AM

Funnily enough, I read an article not long ago in which physicists are now entertaining a type of ''astrological determinism.'' Though that is my own wording. 