Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?

[Johnson Francis]

Today, N2LKR, Eric H Todd raised an interesting point on the QRZ forum. He observed the peaks of historical solar cycles and found a 'Sine Wave' like pattern.

Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this aspect.

de Jon, VU2JO

[Black Michael]

It's called the Schwabe Cycle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle

Mike W9MDB

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxrCBzNmJCvYZB70OBJ3iVSVdt3VAdUy90jbMUimfFtTSQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Johnson Francis]

Thanks a lot Mike, for the prompt response.

de Jon, VU2JO

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/1457198619.3053881.1716997626459%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Johnson Francis]

Mike,

The Wikipedia page which you mentioned gives Schwabe cycle as an eponym for the 11 year Solar Cycle and not as a 'Super cycle' of solar cycle peaks over a century or so.

NASA JPL page mentions: "Schwabe conducted observations of the Sun from 1826 to 1843 and determined that the Sun rotates on its axis once in 27 days. He also established that activity on the Sun increases and decreases over approximately an 11 year cycle."

Anyway thank you for drawing my attention to the work of Schwabe, though that was not the 'cycle' which I meant. 

de Jon, VU2JO

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:17 PM 'Black Michael' via HamSCI <ham...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/1457198619.3053881.1716997626459%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Carl Luetzelschwab]

Jon,

Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all previous 24 solar cycles.

We've been through three periods of big solar cycles and two periods of small solar cycles, and we appear to have entered the third period of small solar cycles.

There are several 'cycles' of solar cycles. 

The Schwabe cycle is simply the approximate 11-year duration of a solar cycle.

The Hale cycle is the approximate 22-year duration of two solar cycles in which the Sun's magnetic field goes through its full cycle.

The Gleissberg cycle is the time between each of the periods of big solar cycles (and the time between the two small periods). It is approximately 90 years.

Using Carbon-14 data, one can see longer cycles in the sunspot record. Somewhere I have that info, and will see if I can find it.

Carl K9LA

[Johnson Francis]

Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year   Schwabe cycle!

de Jon, VU2JO

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFG1d6svbitQHL3BJ8MHw-5mcz7k7%3DvtJwpd1w0bBFfecg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Louis Lanzerotti]

Perhaps provide a reference for the chart. 

Thank you,

Louis J. Lanzerotti

NJIT

-------------------------------

On May 29, 2024, at 12:10 PM, Johnson Francis <pulikko...@gmail.com> wrote:



Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle! de Jon, VU2JO On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9: 34 PM Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluetzelschwab@ gmail. com> wrote: Jon, Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpU5xMhfoQMUAo_EotKyyXBPa9ntD_K5qQfnwLcvxFEVg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Johnson Francis]

This is one place a similar chart was seen: https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity/solar-cycle/historical-solar-cycles.html

I had posted the link in the initial email, but was rejected by the system and then I posted removing all links.

de Jon, VU2JO

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu.

[Carl Luetzelschwab]

Jon,

> So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle!

Yes.

For Louis - I took the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers for each cycle (for example, from https://www.sidc.be/SILSO/datafiles) and plotted them in Excel. I've attached my Excel file with this data.

Carl

[Lawrence Naif]

I wrote an educational piece on this for actuaries.

Please see the attached PDF.

Best,

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxrCBzNmJCvYZB70OBJ3iVSVdt3VAdUy90jbMUimfFtTSQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Carl Luetzelschwab]

Jon,

Here is Carbon-14 data back to 800 AD.

When the change in C-14 is positive, the Sun's magnetic field is weakest (a solar minimum period) and lets in galactic cosmic rays that eventually deposit C-14 into trees. When the change in C-14 is negative, the Sun's magnetic field is strongest (a solar maximum period) and keeps out galactic cosmic rays.  Thus the peaks are solar minimum periods - like the Maunder Minimum.

In addition to the 11-year Schwabe cycle, the 22-year Hale cycle and the 90-year Gleissberg cycle, there appears to be a 205-year De Vries/Suess cycle and a 2300-year Halstatt cycle. Note that the number of years is approximate in all of these 'cycles'. There may even be longer 'cycles'.

Carl K9LA

[Frank M. Howell]

Carl can reply…but the source is most likely Carl himself.

If you’d like an alternative coverage of how the sunspot cycle came to be called that, beginning with Schwabe’s original 10-year estimate, see my talk to the HamSCI community on YouTube:

It’s based on an article co-authored with Scott McIntosh in RadCom (see FoxMikeHotel.com on the landing page).

The longer term cycles are interesting but note: sunspots do not cause themselves. A singular time series of SS #’s will always be modeled with errors vs observed data that is caused by factors not observed in that single time series model…no matter how many cycles of data one has. The RadCom articles and my talk to HamSCI and others gives details on why. McIntosh and his team have delineated an alternative theory with additional factors that shape the magnitude and pattern of SS Cycles.

73,

Frank

K4FMH

On May 29, 2024, at 11:13 AM, Louis Lanzerotti <l...@njit.edu> wrote:

Perhaps provide a reference for the chart. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu.

[Johnson Francis]

So there is a lot more to solar activity than the well known 11 year cycle. Thanks a lot to all who have come up with great responses. Shall go through them in detail.

de Jon, VU2JO

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFEFCbk9VV-36oTVzSSoMhm-QmJ4YTkgE4N9O3sFqq3wrQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Terry Bullett]

I highly recommend the works of Scott McIntosh.  He has some interesting physics-based theories about solar northern and southern hemispheres and that if the timing on both hemispheres is the same you get a bigger peak but if they are out of sync you get a weaker, broader solar max.  I seem to recall about 3-4 years ago he predicted this max would be a big one.

73,
W0ASP  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/73D02419-123A-4D39-AFEA-0D3E4E6350F7%40gmail.com.

-- 
Dr. Terry Bullett          WØASP 
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NOAA/NCEI)
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES)
Terry....@noaa.gov    720-446-9775 (google voice)  978-337-9092 (cell)   
"Life is Complex.  It has a Real part and an Imaginary part." 

[Carl Luetzelschwab]

Terry,

> I highly recommend the works of Scott McIntosh.  He has some interesting physics-based theories about

> solar northern and southern hemispheres and that if the timing on both hemispheres is the same you get

> a bigger peak but if they are out of sync you get a weaker, broader solar max.  I seem to recall about 3-4

> years ago he predicted this max would be a big one.

I also highly recommend the works of Scott and his colleagues. Yes, Scott is a good guy and makes you think. As for the big prediction in 2020, they did revise that big prediction down in 2021 to a cycle slightly above an average cycle. Here's the latest data on Cycle 25 compared to four other cycles. I'll let the readers make their own assessment of where Cycle 25 is and where it may go.

Carl K9LA

[Johnson Francis]

Is there an online version or is it in book form?

de Jon, VU2JO

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/d23a5cb3-6e5f-4f21-b0e7-42624514acce%40noaa.gov.

[George Byrkit]

Dear Jon VU2JO,

It has been said already that some of Scott's work (as presented by Mr Howell) was published in RadCom (August and September 2022 IIRC). Also gave you 'foxmikehotel.com' for a landing page with a link to this and other articles?

I saw and heard Scott speak at HamSCI this year at the banquet. His science is good and exciting. Mr Howell's writing (what you see on FMH.com) is more sensational, and I think unnecessarily so.

73
George K9TRV

-----Original Message-----
From: ham...@googlegroups.com <ham...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Johnson Francis
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:29 AM
To: ham...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HamSCI] Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?

Is there an online version or is it in book form?

de Jon, VU2JO

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 8:03 AM 'Terry Bullett' via HamSCI <ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> > wrote:



I highly recommend the works of Scott McIntosh. He has some interesting physics-based theories about solar northern and southern hemispheres and that if the timing on both hemispheres is the same you get a bigger peak but if they are out of sync you get a weaker, broader solar max. I seem to recall about 3-4 years ago he predicted this max would be a big one.

73,
W0ASP


On 5/29/24 11:41, Frank M. Howell wrote:


Carl can reply…but the source is most likely Carl himself.

If you’d like an alternative coverage of how the sunspot cycle came to be called that, beginning with Schwabe’s original 10-year estimate, see my talk to the HamSCI community on YouTube:

<https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>

Seminar: Revolutionary Alternatives in Sunspot Prediction <https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>
youtu.be <https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>

It’s based on an article co-authored with Scott McIntosh in RadCom (see FoxMikeHotel.com on the landing page).

The longer term cycles are interesting but note: sunspots do not cause themselves. A singular time series of SS #’s will always be modeled with errors vs observed data that is caused by factors not observed in that single time series model…no matter how many cycles of data one has. The RadCom articles and my talk to HamSCI and others gives details on why. McIntosh and his team have delineated an alternative theory with additional factors that shape the magnitude and pattern of SS Cycles.

73,

Frank
K4FMH

On May 29, 2024, at 11:13 AM, Louis Lanzerotti <l...@njit.edu> <mailto:l...@njit.edu> wrote:



 Perhaps provide a reference for the chart.
Thank you,

Louis J. Lanzerotti
NJIT

-------------------------------

On May 29, 2024, at 12:10 PM, Johnson Francis <pulikko...@gmail.com> <mailto:pulikko...@gmail.com> wrote:




Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle! de Jon, VU2JO On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9: 34 PM Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluetzelschwab@ gmail. com> <mailto:carlluetzelschwab@%E2%80%8Agmail.%E2%80%8Acom> wrote: Jon, Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all

Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle!

de Jon, VU2JO

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:34 PM Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluet...@gmail.com <mailto:carlluet...@gmail.com> > wrote:


Jon,

Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all previous 24 solar cycles.

We've been through three periods of big solar cycles and two periods of small solar cycles, and we appear to have entered the third period of small solar cycles.

There are several 'cycles' of solar cycles.

The Schwabe cycle is simply the approximate 11-year duration of a solar cycle.

The Hale cycle is the approximate 22-year duration of two solar cycles in which the Sun's magnetic field goes through its full cycle.

The Gleissberg cycle is the time between each of the periods of big solar cycles (and the time between the two small periods). It is approximately 90 years.

Using Carbon-14 data, one can see longer cycles in the sunspot record. Somewhere I have that info, and will see if I can find it.

Carl K9LA

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines__;!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWDeGpeck$> .

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFG1d6svbitQHL3BJ8MHw-5mcz7k7%3DvtJwpd1w0bBFfecg%40mail.gmail.com <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFG1d6svbitQHL3BJ8MHw-5mcz7k7*3DvtJwpd1w0bBFfecg*40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer__;JSU!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWr6SCVZU$> .


--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines__;!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWDeGpeck$> .

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpU5xMhfoQMUAo_EotKyyXBPa9ntD_K5qQfnwLcvxFEVg%40mail.gmail.com <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpU5xMhfoQMUAo_EotKyyXBPa9ntD_K5qQfnwLcvxFEVg*40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer__;JQ!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWEWNSExM$> .

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/73D02419-123A-4D39-AFEA-0D3E4E6350F7%40gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/73D02419-123A-4D39-AFEA-0D3E4E6350F7%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .

--
Dr. Terry Bullett WØASP
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NOAA/NCEI)
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES)

Terry....@noaa.gov <mailto:Terry....@noaa.gov> 720-446-9775 (google voice) 978-337-9092 (cell)

"Life is Complex. It has a Real part and an Imaginary part."



--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/d23a5cb3-6e5f-4f21-b0e7-42624514acce%40noaa.gov <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/d23a5cb3-6e5f-4f21-b0e7-42624514acce%40noaa.gov?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpAfiRwNEpqnaHhjmpRvh1K2_L%2B-9Dov9dtRCo0JJcnNg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpAfiRwNEpqnaHhjmpRvh1K2_L%2B-9Dov9dtRCo0JJcnNg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .

[Marco Lisi]

A better insight on the existence of cycles other than the 11-years one can be obtained by performing a spectral analysis (Fourier transform) of the sun-spots distribution over the years:

This is the histogram of the average number of sun-spots in the years 1801 thru 1995,  ( ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/GROUP_SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/monthrg.dat)-

The spectral density shows a clear peak at about 11 years period, but no evidence of super-cycles is present, as the often envisioned super-cycle of 88 years or Gleissberg cycle (http://solar.physics.montana.edu/reu/2006/awilmot/obs.html).

Another attempt:

Again the 11 years peak is confirmed, with some variations between 10 and 12 years.

The reason why a super-cycle of 88 years is hard to detect is related to the scarcity of historical data about sun spots, which spans for little more than 2*88 years. A more refined and sophisticated analysis would be required.

73 de Marco, IZ0FNO

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxrCBzNmJCvYZB70OBJ3iVSVdt3VAdUy90jbMUimfFtTSQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

--------------------------------

Prof. ing. Marco Lisi

FRIN, FBIS, SMAIAA, SMIEEE

Board Member at Italian Space Agency (ASI)

Independent Consultant

Aerospace & Defense

[Johnson Francis]

Thank you

de Jon, VU2JO

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/008501dab28e%2484b31540%248e193fc0%24%40chartermi.net.

[Johnson Francis]

Maybe it can be decided after detailed analysis of Carbon 14 deposition data as some others have pointed out.

de Jon, VU2JO

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAKxr9d-XRf92FPewyJgFJ%2BErLjHWgTQ%2BX%2Bggdn6NqV70NM1xsg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Carl Luetzelschwab]

Jon,

It is an Excel plot that I have constructed from publicly available sunspot data. You should be able to click on it and download it as an image. I update it every month, and monthly mean data from the month of May will be out in a couple days to calculate the smoothed sunspot number for November 2023 (which will be added to the existing plot).

To reiterate, I am not knocking Scott and his colleagues. I believe they are on the right track with the concept of a 'terminator' (end of a magnetic cycle within the Sun) to better understand solar cycles.

Carl K9LA

[Johnson Francis]

Thank you

de Jon, VU2JO

--

Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFGrpSKsB3rYH2ZL7nkSeQpPW%2BraCdNB7_cRoovzn1smMQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Frank M. Howell]

George,

Scott’s talk at HamSCI, from the slides that he sent me as he was finalizing them, included one that explicitly included the RadCom articles that he and I coauthored. I believe that he encouraged radio amateurs to read them. There is NO daylight between Dr. McIntosh and me on the matter so if you think my talks are unnecessarily “sensational,” you think his are too.

My PhD is not in solar physics but sociology and statistics where I’ve studied institutional science and advised major funding agencies on strategies first growth. I’ve worked closely with Dr. McIntosh since I interviewed him for the ICQ Podcast a few years ago. I’ve learned a great deal from him and his colleagues. Nothing I write about Dr. McIntosh’s work (and that of Dr. Leamon, for whom I am an academic reference) has not been vetted by Scott. He has acknowledged my advice on at least two of his most important papers. You should be aware of this.

You seem to be wholly unaware of the study of institutional science when you declare my work as “sensational” (and erroneously state it is at “fmh.com”. The two correct links are K4FMH.com and FoxMikeHotel.com.) It is not. Rather, should you watch my HamSCI talk, you would be aware that it is standard fare for studying scientific change. As I stated there and elsewhere, my work with Dr. McIntosh began with my reviewing his most significant paper and helping him frame the argument more sharply as a paradigm change for a science that has been highly devoid of explicit theory in predicting sunspot patterns. Most hams are not aware of the Schwabe inductive inference and Wolf’s update with the full catalog of sunspot counts. There is NO formal theory in this inductive inference. I outline this in my talks. This is basic philosophy of science, not sensationalism.

The book published by the very well-known Harvard trained physicist Thomas Kuhn is indeed what is used by institutional science itself to track and analyze major changes in scientific theory. You may think Dr. McIntosh and I are being “sensational” in comparing the extant NASA/NOAA forecasts that are devoid of explicit theory (or methods released publicly). But it IS the same approach used by NSF, NIH, NASA, and USDA to identify promising new approaches in specific areas of science for funding. I’ve been on NSF panels, a consultant to NIH, a badged official at NASA’s Stennis Space Center, and GS-15 Panel Manager for USDA. I think I have direct experience to make the statements I have made here.

The opinion that Dr. McIntosh and I share is that it is indeed necessary to make these claims of a pending “revolutionary” (a term used by Dr. Kuhn) change in the paradigm used to understand the cyclic patterns of sunspot counts. The continual fitting of a-theoretical curves to these data will not yield much of any scientific advance, other than being fodder for those invested in doing so. As Dr. Kuhn demonstrated in his famous book, mindless regurgitation of the same data without alternative theoretical challenges does not foster improvement in the science. But it does cause dispute and consternation among those ardent followers of the extant approach.

We may indeed be on the cusp of a revolution in the cessation of mindless curve-fitting of singular time-series of sunspot counts. We shall see when Cycle 25 completes its course how accurate are the NASA/NOAA/ISED Panel forecast versus the McIntosh team’s model are. It is an exciting time for this area of science, just as it was a century ago first Einstein’s challenge of Newton.

Best regards,

Frank
K4FMH
—-
Frank M. Howell, PhD
Professor Emeritus, Mississippi Stare University
Affiliated Faculty, Emory University


> On May 30, 2024, at 7:40 AM, George Byrkit <ghby...@chartermi.net> wrote:
>
> Dear Jon VU2JO,

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/008501dab28e%2484b31540%248e193fc0%24%40chartermi.net.

[George Byrkit]

Frank,

I regret you interpreted my remarks that way. I generally want to keep some claims and words out of articles dealing with science. I did not hear such claims in the style Scott presented at HamSCI. If I drew the wrong conclusion, I'm sorry. However, when I first read the articles, I did find their style to be not to my liking. I'm trying to put it into words, but I seem to have failed. But I can say that your use of terms like 'mindless' in your reply do seem over the top.

Yes, paradigms will change over time. Too fast for some, too slowly for others.

73
George Byrkit, K9TRV

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/0CA11FA2-6E9C-4560-8295-BA8CA9356389%40gmail.com.

[Frank M. Howell]

George,

Thank you for the professional reply. Not everyone will like another’s writing style. As a writer and editor of some four decades or more, I am certainly well aware of that.

I use technical terms from statistics a lot. “Mindless” here is a conventional term for prediction rather than explanation. The former is said to be devoid of explicit theory specifying the model (“mindless”) whereas explanation has some formal (explicitly stated) theory used to specify a model ("mindful"). It’s not a personal insult but rather a technical convention.

I’ll repeat that these exchanges, if kept professional as you and are doing, does help further scientific thinking. it is an exciting time for this area of science.

Look up Dr. Leamon and coauthor's "sunspot time clock" paper. You will see why calling solar min and max the peak and trough of sunspot counts is ill-informed. This graphic may well become an active data viz for our monitoring of sunspot behavior in the future!

Frank
K4FMH

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 30, 2024, at 10:32 AM, George Byrkit <ghby...@chartermi.net> wrote:
>
> Frank,

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/00ae01dab2a6%2483bb81f0%248b3285d0%24%40chartermi.net.

[Nicholas Hall-Patch]

Are the RadCom articles available (for purchase or ?) to non RSGB members, Frank, or anyone else?

Thanks.

Nick

VE7DXR

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/5B8EEA37-9AC0-42E2-A607-706EEF3F48C3%40gmail.com.

[George Byrkit]

This page on the RSGB website,
https://www.rsgbshop.org/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Radcom___QST_17.html

offers CD and USB stick per-year versions. There are archive sets as well, and they seem to offer back issues, but only for the rolling past 12 months. Your best option is that 15 Quid CD or USB for 2022.

73
George K9TRV

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Nicholas Hall-Patch' via HamSCI <ham...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:38 PM
To: ham...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HamSCI] Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?

Are the RadCom articles available (for purchase or ?) to non RSGB members, Frank, or anyone else?

Thanks.

Nick
VE7DXR

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 4:02 PM Frank M. Howell <frankm...@gmail.com <mailto:frankm...@gmail.com> > wrote:


George,

Thank you for the professional reply. Not everyone will like another’s writing style. As a writer and editor of some four decades or more, I am certainly well aware of that.

I use technical terms from statistics a lot. “Mindless” here is a conventional term for prediction rather than explanation. The former is said to be devoid of explicit theory specifying the model (“mindless”) whereas explanation has some formal (explicitly stated) theory used to specify a model ("mindful"). It’s not a personal insult but rather a technical convention.

I’ll repeat that these exchanges, if kept professional as you and are doing, does help further scientific thinking. it is an exciting time for this area of science.

Look up Dr. Leamon and coauthor's "sunspot time clock" paper. You will see why calling solar min and max the peak and trough of sunspot counts is ill-informed. This graphic may well become an active data viz for our monitoring of sunspot behavior in the future!

Frank
K4FMH

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 30, 2024, at 10:32 AM, George Byrkit <ghby...@chartermi.net <mailto:ghby...@chartermi.net> > wrote:
>
> Frank,
>
> I regret you interpreted my remarks that way. I generally want to keep some claims and words out of articles dealing with science. I did not hear such claims in the style Scott presented at HamSCI. If I drew the wrong conclusion, I'm sorry. However, when I first read the articles, I did find their style to be not to my liking. I'm trying to put it into words, but I seem to have failed. But I can say that your use of terms like 'mindless' in your reply do seem over the top.
>
> Yes, paradigms will change over time. Too fast for some, too slowly for others.
>
> 73
> George Byrkit, K9TRV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> <ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of Frank M. Howell
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 11:16 AM
> To: ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com>
> Cc: Scott McIntosh <msc...@ucar.edu <mailto:msc...@ucar.edu> >; Robert Leamon <boba...@mac.com <mailto:boba...@mac.com> >
> Subject: Re: [HamSCI] Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?
>
> George,
>
> Scott’s talk at HamSCI, from the slides that he sent me as he was finalizing them, included one that explicitly included the RadCom articles that he and I coauthored. I believe that he encouraged radio amateurs to read them. There is NO daylight between Dr. McIntosh and me on the matter so if you think my talks are unnecessarily “sensational,” you think his are too.
>
> My PhD is not in solar physics but sociology and statistics where I’ve studied institutional science and advised major funding agencies on strategies first growth. I’ve worked closely with Dr. McIntosh since I interviewed him for the ICQ Podcast a few years ago. I’ve learned a great deal from him and his colleagues. Nothing I write about Dr. McIntosh’s work (and that of Dr. Leamon, for whom I am an academic reference) has not been vetted by Scott. He has acknowledged my advice on at least two of his most important papers. You should be aware of this.
>

> You seem to be wholly unaware of the study of institutional science when you declare my work as “sensational” (and erroneously state it is at “fmh.com <http://fmh.com> ”. The two correct links are K4FMH.com and FoxMikeHotel.com.) It is not. Rather, should you watch my HamSCI talk, you would be aware that it is standard fare for studying scientific change. As I stated there and elsewhere, my work with Dr. McIntosh began with my reviewing his most significant paper and helping him frame the argument more sharply as a paradigm change for a science that has been highly devoid of explicit theory in predicting sunspot patterns. Most hams are not aware of the Schwabe inductive inference and Wolf’s update with the full catalog of sunspot counts. There is NO formal theory in this inductive inference. I outline this in my talks. This is basic philosophy of science, not sensationalism.

>
> The book published by the very well-known Harvard trained physicist Thomas Kuhn is indeed what is used by institutional science itself to track and analyze major changes in scientific theory. You may think Dr. McIntosh and I are being “sensational” in comparing the extant NASA/NOAA forecasts that are devoid of explicit theory (or methods released publicly). But it IS the same approach used by NSF, NIH, NASA, and USDA to identify promising new approaches in specific areas of science for funding. I’ve been on NSF panels, a consultant to NIH, a badged official at NASA’s Stennis Space Center, and GS-15 Panel Manager for USDA. I think I have direct experience to make the statements I have made here.
>
> The opinion that Dr. McIntosh and I share is that it is indeed necessary to make these claims of a pending “revolutionary” (a term used by Dr. Kuhn) change in the paradigm used to understand the cyclic patterns of sunspot counts. The continual fitting of a-theoretical curves to these data will not yield much of any scientific advance, other than being fodder for those invested in doing so. As Dr. Kuhn demonstrated in his famous book, mindless regurgitation of the same data without alternative theoretical challenges does not foster improvement in the science. But it does cause dispute and consternation among those ardent followers of the extant approach.
>
> We may indeed be on the cusp of a revolution in the cessation of mindless curve-fitting of singular time-series of sunspot counts. We shall see when Cycle 25 completes its course how accurate are the NASA/NOAA/ISED Panel forecast versus the McIntosh team’s model are. It is an exciting time for this area of science, just as it was a century ago first Einstein’s challenge of Newton.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Frank
> K4FMH
> —-
> Frank M. Howell, PhD
> Professor Emeritus, Mississippi Stare University
> Affiliated Faculty, Emory University
>
>
>> On May 30, 2024, at 7:40 AM, George Byrkit <ghby...@chartermi.net <mailto:ghby...@chartermi.net> > wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jon VU2JO,
>>

>> It has been said already that some of Scott's work (as presented by Mr Howell) was published in RadCom (August and September 2022 IIRC). Also gave you 'foxmikehotel.com <http://foxmikehotel.com> ' for a landing page with a link to this and other articles?

>>
>> I saw and heard Scott speak at HamSCI this year at the banquet. His science is good and exciting. Mr Howell's writing (what you see on FMH.com) is more sensational, and I think unnecessarily so.
>>
>> 73
>> George K9TRV
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> <ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of Johnson Francis
>> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:29 AM
>> To: ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [HamSCI] Is there a 'Super Solar Cycle' of Solar Cycles?
>>
>> Is there an online version or is it in book form?
>>
>> de Jon, VU2JO
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 8:03 AM 'Terry Bullett' via HamSCI <ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com <mailto:ham...@googlegroups.com> > > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I highly recommend the works of Scott McIntosh. He has some interesting physics-based theories about solar northern and southern hemispheres and that if the timing on both hemispheres is the same you get a bigger peak but if they are out of sync you get a weaker, broader solar max. I seem to recall about 3-4 years ago he predicted this max would be a big one.
>>
>> 73,
>> W0ASP
>>
>>
>> On 5/29/24 11:41, Frank M. Howell wrote:
>>
>>
>> Carl can reply…but the source is most likely Carl himself.
>>
>> If you’d like an alternative coverage of how the sunspot cycle came to be called that, beginning with Schwabe’s original 10-year estimate, see my talk to the HamSCI community on YouTube:
>>
>> <https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>
>>
>> Seminar: Revolutionary Alternatives in Sunspot Prediction <https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>

>> youtu.be <http://youtu.be> <https://youtu.be/r4Ocqcgy3mk>

>>
>> It’s based on an article co-authored with Scott McIntosh in RadCom (see FoxMikeHotel.com on the landing page).
>>
>> The longer term cycles are interesting but note: sunspots do not cause themselves. A singular time series of SS #’s will always be modeled with errors vs observed data that is caused by factors not observed in that single time series model…no matter how many cycles of data one has. The RadCom articles and my talk to HamSCI and others gives details on why. McIntosh and his team have delineated an alternative theory with additional factors that shape the magnitude and pattern of SS Cycles.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Frank
>> K4FMH
>>
>>
>> On May 29, 2024, at 11:13 AM, Louis Lanzerotti <l...@njit.edu <mailto:l...@njit.edu> > <mailto:l...@njit.edu <mailto:l...@njit.edu> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>  Perhaps provide a reference for the chart.
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Louis J. Lanzerotti
>> NJIT
>>
>> -------------------------------
>>
>>

>> On May 29, 2024, at 12:10 PM, Johnson Francis <pulikko...@gmail.com <mailto:pulikko...@gmail.com> > <mailto:pulikko...@gmail.com <mailto:pulikko...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle! de Jon, VU2JO On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9: 34 PM Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluetzelschwab@ gmail. com> <mailto:carlluetzelschwab@ <mailto:carlluetzelschwab@> %E2%80%8Agmail.%E2%80%8Acom> wrote: Jon, Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all

>> Thanks a lot Carl. So there is more to it than the 11 year Schwabe cycle!
>>
>> de Jon, VU2JO
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:34 PM Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluet...@gmail.com <mailto:carlluet...@gmail.com> <mailto:carlluet...@gmail.com <mailto:carlluet...@gmail.com> > > wrote:
>>
>>
>> Jon,
>>
>> Here are the maximum smoothed sunspot numbers of all previous 24 solar cycles.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> We've been through three periods of big solar cycles and two periods of small solar cycles, and we appear to have entered the third period of small solar cycles.
>>
>> There are several 'cycles' of solar cycles.
>>
>> The Schwabe cycle is simply the approximate 11-year duration of a solar cycle.
>>
>> The Hale cycle is the approximate 22-year duration of two solar cycles in which the Sun's magnetic field goes through its full cycle.
>>
>> The Gleissberg cycle is the time between each of the periods of big solar cycles (and the time between the two small periods). It is approximately 90 years.
>>
>> Using Carbon-14 data, one can see longer cycles in the sunspot record. Somewhere I have that info, and will see if I can find it.
>>
>> Carl K9LA
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines__;!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWDeGpeck$> .
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFG1d6svbitQHL3BJ8MHw-5mcz7k7%3DvtJwpd1w0bBFfecg%40mail.gmail.com <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAAx1FFG1d6svbitQHL3BJ8MHw-5mcz7k7*3DvtJwpd1w0bBFfecg*40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer__;JSU!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWr6SCVZU$> .
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines__;!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWDeGpeck$> .
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpU5xMhfoQMUAo_EotKyyXBPa9ntD_K5qQfnwLcvxFEVg%40mail.gmail.com <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpU5xMhfoQMUAo_EotKyyXBPa9ntD_K5qQfnwLcvxFEVg*40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer__;JQ!!DLa72PTfQgg!I_An6yaFnDOYF9l3U-r-nQiAp_tTWIQfkSyBbeIvVNzXbRPlqfrYc_ALXn5767Gdn1mZ6j3u0rAT0gzWEWNSExM$> .
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/FECEC160-46F5-429E-8A02-C2F90843DACB%40njit.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/73D02419-123A-4D39-AFEA-0D3E4E6350F7%40gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/73D02419-123A-4D39-AFEA-0D3E4E6350F7%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Terry Bullett WØASP
>> NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NOAA/NCEI)
>> Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES)

>> Terry....@noaa.gov <mailto:Terry....@noaa.gov> <mailto:Terry....@noaa.gov <mailto:Terry....@noaa.gov> > 720-446-9775 (google voice) 978-337-9092 (cell)

>> "Life is Complex. It has a Real part and an Imaginary part."
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/d23a5cb3-6e5f-4f21-b0e7-42624514acce%40noaa.gov <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/d23a5cb3-6e5f-4f21-b0e7-42624514acce%40noaa.gov?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> > .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpAfiRwNEpqnaHhjmpRvh1K2_L%2B-9Dov9dtRCo0JJcnNg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAP9dWxpAfiRwNEpqnaHhjmpRvh1K2_L%2B-9Dov9dtRCo0JJcnNg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> .

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/008501dab28e%2484b31540%248e193fc0%24%40chartermi.net.
>
> --
> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> .

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/0CA11FA2-6E9C-4560-8295-BA8CA9356389%40gmail.com.
>
> --
> Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> .

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/00ae01dab2a6%2483bb81f0%248b3285d0%24%40chartermi.net.

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/5B8EEA37-9AC0-42E2-A607-706EEF3F48C3%40gmail.com.

--
Please follow the HamSCI Community Participation Guidelines at http://hamsci.org/hamsci-community-participation-guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HamSCI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com <mailto:hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com> .

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAL2VG_PeOAamKLQm4WJXM2-7VnNRpQNL41gJ0s%3D-v5mAXUEsTQ%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/CAL2VG_PeOAamKLQm4WJXM2-7VnNRpQNL41gJ0s%3D-v5mAXUEsTQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .

[Frank M. Howell]

Nick,

Contact me offline…K4FMH is the call sign on qrz.com for my email.

Frank

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 30, 2024, at 2:01 PM, George Byrkit <ghby...@chartermi.net> wrote:
>
> This page on the RSGB website,

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hamsci+un...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hamsci/00e001dab2c3%24ce83c540%246b8b4fc0%24%40chartermi.net.