ISSN 1019 3316, Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2013, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 275–285. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd.,...


ton fluxes, coming from the Earth’s radiation belts,
penetrate the ionosphere. However, the stumbling
stone ...

emerged and deepened in the near ultraviolet region of
wavelengths, and the ...


Thus, a new role of microwave radiation is suggested in
microprocesses in the Earth’s lower atmosphere with

not oscillate with a period of 11 years—the main solar
activity cycle; inste...

Cloudiness, %


December 2009










Magnetic storms



1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970...





Fig. 6. Average monthly values of cosmic ray variations at th...

The comparative quantitative analysis of the ener
getics of anthropogenic an...


spread mistake. Many meteorological and geographi
cal publications about the nature of global climatic










anomalous ex...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5

Herald1303001 avakyankor


Published on

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Herald1303001 avakyankor

  1. 1. ISSN 1019 3316, Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2013, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 275–285. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2013. Original Russian Text © S.V. Avakyan, 2013, published in Vestnik Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk, 2013, Vol. 83, No. 5, pp. 425–436. Environmental Problems The author associates the recently observed climate warming and carbon dioxide concentration growth in the lower atmospheric layers with variations of solar–geomagnetic activity in global cloud formation and the sig nificant decrease in the role of forests in carbon dioxide accumulation in the process of photosynthesis. The contribution of the greenhouse effect of carbon bearing gases to global warming turns out to be insignificant. DOI: 10.1134/S1019331613030015 The Role of Solar Activity in Global Warming S. V. Avakyan* More than 40 years ago, in the fall of 1972, the first All Union conference “Solar–Atmospheric Correla tions in Climate Theory and Weather Forecasts” was held in Moscow. It adopted a resolution that formu lated still topical problems and objectives. The confer ence stated [1, p. 463], Studies on the Sun–atmosphere problem, which have been performed in the Soviet Union and abroad for several decades, make it possible to regard as proved the existence of a considerable influence of solar activity and other cosmic and geophysical fac tors on atmospheric processes. Consequently, studies on this problem are of high practical significance …. In May 1973, the Hydrometeorological Service Headquarters organized the Scientific Council on Solar–Atmospheric Correlations in Weather Fore casts; before this, the Laboratory of Solar–Terrestrial Correlations at the Hydrometeorological Center was opened. However, it is becoming obvious that the then natural science was short of the necessary data about the environment. Moreover, meteorologists and cli matologists were not prepared for taking into account solar activity. Today the scientific world enjoys a significantly larger reserve of knowledge about the nature and intensity of solar–geomagnetic disturbances and their manifestations in the environment, including the bio sphere and human beings. On the other hand, the problem of the global increase in the mean surface temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the lower atmosphere, which is believed to be the main source of the greenhouse effect, has been dis cussed at all levels for more than two decades. In 2004, our country ratified the Kyoto Protocol, designed to decrease emissions of greenhouse gases, including CO2, but suspended its participation in the protocol’s realization not long ago. The point is that the switch of world powers first to decreasing the use of fossil fuel * Sergei Vazgenovich Avakyan, Dr. Sci. (Phys.–Math.), is head of the Laboratory of Aerospace Physical Optics at the Vavilov State Optical Institute and a leading researcher of the RAS Chief (Pulkovo) Astronomical Observatory. and then to carbon free energy within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol may lead to economic collapse for Russia as a consequence of the reduction and, probably, even loss of the possibility to sell oil and nat ural gas on the world market. The basis for this con cern is that our most important industries (defense, aerospace, heavy engineering) have been in crisis for decades. THE IONOSPHERE AS A CURRENT SOLAR ACTIVITY SIGNAL GENERATOR The modern science of climatology gives no answer sufficiently accurate and reliable for practical applica tions to the question of what the main cause of the cur rent climate warming is and of how this process will develop in the near future. To date, the main difficulty has been to assess the role of variations in solar activity. As a rule, all attempts to account for the contribution of solar–cosmic factors to the external impact on the weather–climate system are reduced to considering variations in the full flux of solar radiant energy or cos mic rays. However, the changes in both are very insig nificant. It is worth recalling in this respect the constant value of the main part of the Sun’s radiant energy flux (this value is called the solar constant) coming to the lower atmosphere, the troposphere. This flux is now 342 W m–2 with account for the Earth’s sphericity. According to the current assumptions, changes in the solar constant value outside the atmosphere during both the 11 year cycle of solar activity and secular variations do not exceed 0.1% (at least, for the last 300 years). In studying the contribution of solar activity to weather and climate change, we proposed to account for well known variations in electromagnetic radiation in the most shortwave and changeable part of the spec trum—the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) and X ray ranges. These variations are accompanied by distur bances in geomagnetic activity associated with cor puscular solar activity, under which electron and pro 275
  2. 2. 276 AVAKYAN ton fluxes, coming from the Earth’s radiation belts, penetrate the ionosphere. However, the stumbling stone for the Sun–weather–climate problem was the absence of a mechanism that would explain how the energy of solar impacts on the upper atmosphere (Earth’s ionosphere at heights of 60–500 km), where both solar shortwave radiation and the fluxes of cor puscles from the radiation belts were fully absorbed, could manifest itself in the troposphere, i.e., in its weather–climatic characteristics. Upon proposing such a mechanism, we were able to consider as the basis for solar variability impacts on weather–climatic characteristics the ionizing radia tion of solar flares and corpuscular precipitations under geomagnetic disturbances rather than cosmic rays, both galactic (GCRs) and solar (SCRs). In fact, these factors of solar–geomagnetic activity—flares and geomagnetic storms—prevail both by energy and, what is more important, by recurrence. Indeed, up to 50 solar flares of the M5 class and higher and 20–70 geomagnetic storms with Кр = 6 and more occur (depending on the phase of the 11 year solar cycle) yearly on average. At the same time, a GCR decrease is observed several times a year at a level of less than 3% and once a year at a level of 20%, while SCRs are reg istered in the earth’s orbit five times a year on average as a proton flux emerges with an energy higher than 100 MeV. All the fluxes that change considerably depending on the level of solar–geomagnetic activity and ionize the earth’s upper atmosphere lose their energy in the ionosphere, bringing it into a state of high excitation. Then, if there is a channel transmitting this excitation directly to the troposphere, where the weather and cli mate are formed, significant correlations of meteoro logical characteristics with solar activity factors must be present, including global climatic changes. The purpose of our research was to determine the role of the Sun’s influence on the global warming of the surface air, already observable for more than 35 years. There is still no convincing evidence of anthropogenic impact on the current climate change. However, such studies have always encountered two formidable barri ers. First, in discussing energy problems of the solar– magnetospheric impact on weather–climatic charac teristics, scientists usually emphasize the necessity to look for indirect or trigger mechanisms that transmit the effects of variations in solar–geomagnetic activity to the troposphere to obtain meteorologically signifi cant changes in it. The point is that the energy of any changeable part of the solar spectrum is very small rel ative to the mean energy of atmospheric formations (for example, a cyclone). Second, as was mentioned, all the most significant energy fluxes coming from solar flares and occurring during geomagnetic storms fully dissipate in the earth’s ionosphere. This is why we should view the earth’s ionosphere as the most natural and effective element of the indirect mechanism of solar–atmospheric correlations. Earlier, we showed the substantial role of the iono sphere in heliogeobiocorrelations [2] owing to the introduction of a new agent of solar–terrestrial corre lations—ionospheric microwave radiation—which emerges in transitions between highly excited (Ryd berg) states of all ionospheric components. The studies were based on the experience of modeling disturbances in the ionosphere under the action of solar flares and electron precipitation from radiation belts during geo magnetic storms and under various artificial impacts. These disturbances manifest themselves when recording the degree of ionization of the upper atmo sphere by the radio sounding method and during opti cal studies, including visual–instrumental observa tions of ionospheric glow from manned space vehicles. To construct more accurate and advanced models of ionospheric disturbances, we were the first to intro duce in aeronomy the following three high threshold energy processes, known from the physics of atomic collisions: the Auger effect; the double photoioniza tion of the outer electron shell; and the excitation of highly excited (Rydberg) states by the impact of ener getic ionospheric electrons—photoelectrons, second ary electrons, and Auger electrons. The role of these processes under solar flares and magnetic storms sharply increases because of the hardening of the spec tra of the flux of quanta and electrons that ionize the upper atmosphere. THE RADIO OPTICAL THREE STEP TRIGGER MECHANISM OF SOLAR–TROPOSPHERIC CORRELATIONS It is stressed in [3] that the change in solar radiation as a climate forming factor requires special attention, although we are still far from understanding possible mechanisms that strengthen the influence of solar activity on the climate. More and more experimental evidence appears daily to prove the connection of heliogeophysical factors with weather–climatic phe nomena, including hazardous ones, such as hurri canes. As the main cause of weather changes in the lower atmosphere, we consider the condensation mechanism, including the important contribution of microwave radiation caused by high solar activity in the form of shortwave flares and radio bursts. This is based on experimental facts concerning the impact of microwave radiation on the condensation mechanism [4, 5]: by observing variations in the atmosphere’s optical transparency and a number of weather charac teristics from a high altitude observatory, it was dis covered that they were connected with solar micro wave radiation bursts and, what was even more impor tant, with solar flares themselves. It was established that such impacts resulted in the formation of water clusters, owing to which cluster absorption bands HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  3. 3. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING emerged and deepened in the near ultraviolet region of wavelengths, and the spectral optical atmospheric depth decreased in the visible and IR regions (as well as in the absorption bands of water vapors). On the other hand, the Radiophysical Research Institute in Nizhni Novgorod registered sporadic rises in the intensity of ionospheric microwave radiation during solar flares and auroras (during geomagnetic storms and substorms) [6]. Note that the intensity dur ing the flares exceeded many times the typical micro wave bursts of solar origin. The nature of such a signal (radiation in dipole transitions between highly excited—Rydberg—levels with the principal quan tum number n ~ 10–20 and with orbital quantum number change to 1) was disclosed in our works of the mid 1990s [7]. In 2002, the important role of this “Rydberg” mechanism of microwave generation by the disturbed ionosphere was confirmed experimen tally for the first time at the Radiophysical Research Institute on the Sura heating bench (under radio wave absorption at frequencies of 4.7–6.8 MHz), when the observed microwave radiation of the ionosphere at a frequency of 600 MHz [8] was interpreted physically and fully on the basis of our work [7]. These results made it possible to propose a radiooptical three step trigger mechanism of solar– magnetospheric control over weather–climatic phe nomena [9]. This mechanism makes it possible to account for the contribution of variations in the solar flux of ionizing radiation in EUV and X ray ranges, as well as during solar flares, and the contribution of cor puscular fluxes from radiation belts and directly from the magnetosphere under geomagnetic disturbances, as well as during geomagnetic storms. According to our estimates, the flux of microwaves from the iono sphere may reach 10–11 W cm–2 during a strong mag netic storm, while being 10–100 times lower during solar flares. When we study the possibility of the radiooptical mechanism’s contribution to the current climate change, we pay attention in the first place to the global warming of the surface air, observed over the last sev eral decades. One of V.I. Vernadsky’s basic theses is taken into account here [10, p. 95]: The main and decisive part of scientific knowledge is facts and their major and minor empirical generali zations. Scientific theories and hypotheses, despite their importance in current scientific work, are beyond the scope of the main and decisive part of sci entific knowledge. The main importance of hypoth eses and theories is but appearance. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the radiooptical trigger mechanism. Note that the first part of the term radiooptical implies introducing in ionosphere physics a new (“Rydberg”) mechanism of generating radio radiation of the Earth’s ionosphere in the microwave range (wavelengths expressed in millimeters, centime HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Stage I Transformation of the ionospheric solar and geomagnetic energy factors into a microwave flux that penetrates Earth’s surface Stage II 277 Regulating the formation and destruction of cluster ions by microwave radiation Participation of clusters in the formation of cloud and aerosol layers that reflect and absorb the Sun’s radiant energy flux and heat flux from the underlying surface Stage III Fig. 1. General diagram of the radiooptical three step trig ger effect of solar–geomagnetic factors on tropospheric characteristics. ters, and decimeters), disturbed under the action of the ionizing radiation of a flare on the Sun or by elec trons precipitating into the ionosphere during mag netic storms (auroras). The “optical” part of the mechanism is connected with accounting for the impact of both flares on the Sun and solar microwave radio bursts on the content of water vapors in the atmospheric column. This phenomenon was discov ered in the 1980s during high altitude observations (at a height of 2.1 km near Kislovodsk) by associates of the Atmospheric Physics Department of Leningrad State University under the supervision of Academician K.Ya. Kondrat’ev [4, 5]. The authors interpreted these observations as the actuation of a condensation–clus ter mechanism with the formation of cluster com plexes from water vapors. This was confirmed by recording the emerging and deepening cluster absorp tion bands in the area of wavelengths of 320–330, 360, 380–390, 410, and 480 nm. In interpreting the data of laboratory experiments with clusters from water vapors and carbon dioxide, as well as in the area of atmospheric densities, “colli sional dissociative recombination” was proposed as the main process of cluster ion breakdown in the pres ence of molecular gas [11]. It was shown that the dis sociation rate coefficients largely depended on the value of the orbital moment l of the Rydberg level dur ing collision: the probability of dissociation increases for low l values and, correspondingly, it becomes low at large l values. Consequently, during solar radiation bursts and, even more so, during sporadic rises in the intensity of the ionosphere’s microwave Rydberg radi ation (during solar UV and X ray flares and geomag netic storms), we will observe the filling of Rydberg levels with higher l values in the process of “collisional dissociative recombination,” induced by the absorp tion of the strengthened microwave radiation flux, and, as a result, a decrease in the probability of the dis sociation of cluster ions of the lower atmosphere. Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  4. 4. 278 AVAKYAN Thus, a new role of microwave radiation is suggested in microprocesses in the Earth’s lower atmosphere with the participation of water cluster ions: the influence on the probability of these clusters' dissociation through the “collisional dissociative recombination” mecha nism ensuring the emergence of high Rydberg electron state orbital quantum number values (emerging under the absorption of microwave radiation quanta of both the Sun and the ionosphere). Dissociation rate coeffi cients depend on the energy of quanta (and, conse quently, on the wavelength) of the absorbed microwave radiation. This leads to the deceleration of the rate of the primary reaction of cluster ion destruction and, as a consequence, to an increase in their concentration in the troposphere. Proceeding from [4, 5], as well as from studies that confirm the important role of highly excited (Ryd berg) states in the processes of association of large molecules and clusters and the dissociative recombi nation of cluster ions [for example, 11], we may state that the microwave flux prompts a growing concentra tion of water vapor clusters in the troposphere, which is accompanied by the formation of optically thin clouds (initially, condensation haze). Let us stress that all the steps of the proposed mechanism are confirmed experimentally: iono spheric microwave radiation, amplified during solar flares and magnetic storms, was discovered [6]; the core role of the Rydberg mechanism of microwave ionospheric radiation was proved by direct radiophys ical active impacts on the Earth’s ionosphere in domestic experiments by scientists at the Radiophysi cal Research Institute on the Sura heating bench [8]; humidity regulation at altitudes higher than 2 km by both solar radiation and solar flares [4, 5] was proved; and the direct influence of solar flares and magnetic storms on overcast weather was clearly fixed [12]. The cloud cover generated anew after solar flares and geomagnetic storms is in its initial form a medium transmitting more than 90% of the incoming solar radiation flux. However, it intercepts about half of the thermal radiation going to space from the underlying surface. This is why such optically thin clouds are warming. Their increased formation after flares on the Sun and global magnetic storms (and, on the whole, in periods of high solar–geomagnetic activity), accord ing to the radiooptical mechanism, is the main cause of the current global warming, connected with the epoch of the maxima of secular (quasi centenary and quasi bicentenary) cycles of heliogeophysical activity. A good confirmation of the correctness of this approach is data of the UW HIRAS satellite experi ment, during which, during the centenary maximum of solar activity (measured in 1979–2001), a 10–15% increased overcast content compared to all other satel lite experiments was registered (because the HIRAS equipment can additionally record semitransparent cirrus clouds). Earlier, in [13] the necessity to study optically thin cirrus clouds was emphasized, especially “thin and invisible cirrus clouds” and primarily in the liquid–drop fraction because it was at this stage that the cloud layer caused a substantial warming of the subcloud layer of the atmosphere. In compliance with the radiooptical mechanism, such cloud generations are preceded by the formation of a practically invisible condensation haze under the clusterization of water vapors in the field of microwaves from the ionosphere during solar flares and magnetic storms. The proposed mechanism of the emergence of incipient, optically thin, and actually cirrus, cloudi ness during solar flares and geomagnetic storms allows us to outline the vectors of powerful effects of solar– geomagnetic activity on cyclogenesis. Indeed, accord ing to [14], specifying in simulation models the pres ence of cirrus clouds with an area of about 1.2 × 1.2 km, for example, in the wake of an anticyclone, reduces most strongly (up to 2 hPa) the surface atmo spheric pressure and, above all, shifts its further trajec tory. This is what happens in the middle latitudes, while, for the subarctic zone, the largest impact on such a change in the path of an anticyclone is caused by the emergence of cirrus clouds in the center and in the frontal part of the anticyclone. To change the atmosphere’s circulation regime associated with the generation of the kinetic energy of atmospheric motions, it is necessary to spend 2.5–5 W m–2 [14]. Thus, with the emergence of optically thin cloudiness, we observe changes not only in the radio–thermal regime (owing to the warming properties of this cloud iness) but also in the dynamics of the atmosphere (characteristics of cyclones and anticyclones). CAUSES OF THE MODERN GLOBAL WARMING Obviously, to confirm the importance of the mech anism of solar–tropospheric correlations, it is neces sary to explain the observed dependence of weather– climatic effects on the Sun’s cyclic activity. Meteorol ogists, as well as some geophysicists, study the correla tions of weather–climatic characteristics with the uni versally recognized solar activity parameters—Wolf numbers (associated with sunspot formation activity) and with temporal variations of the total electromag netic solar radiation flux—the solar constant. The result turns out to be negative: there are no significant correlations with meteorological parameters either in Wolf numbers or in the variability of the solar constant. This gave grounds for a skeptical attitude to the possi ble influence of solar–geomagnetic activity factors on weather and climate [15]. Indeed, in studying the correlation of surface air temperature (in Moscow, Leningrad, and Oslo) with Wolf numbers, it was obtained that temperature does HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  5. 5. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING not oscillate with a period of 11 years—the main solar activity cycle; instead, stable variations were observed in a range of 2–5.5 years [15]. However, within the radiooptical three step trigger mechanism, this result is quite understandable: an increase in the warming (optically thin) cloudiness takes place owing to the increased flux of microwaves from the ionosphere both under the action of solar flares and during magnetic storms. The 11 year cycle has two maxima of the prob ability of such flares and two maxima of the probability of such storms, and, as a rule, they do not coincide [16]. As a result, over 11 years, two very powerful microwave impacts on the content of water vapor in the troposphere (with cluster coagulation) take place: during magnetic storms and, usually less intensive, during solar flares, primarily within intervals between the maxima of geomagnetic storms. This explains the spread of the periods from 2 to 5.5 years in the temper ature maxima observed in Moscow, Leningrad, and Oslo [15, 17]. A result important for year to year variations of hydrological processes was obtained in [18], which, in particular, specified the same 2 to 4 year quasi period among those associated by the authors with the gravi tational effect of the Jupiter–Venus pair. Note that periods in the 2 to 6 year range for precipitation in Oslo manifest themselves in the data of an earlier work [17] as well. To all appearances, we should seek the channels of the influence of solar–geomagnetic cyclic activity on hydrological processes within the radioop tical mechanism primarily with account for the effect of precipitation stimulated from lower clouds under the emergence of optically thin clouds after flares and magnetic storms. As was shown in [14], an analog of such clouds, cirrus clouds, may “seed” lower clouds with their crystals and cause precipitation. As is known, in addition to the 11 year cycle of solar activity, there are longer cycles. We substantiated the decisive influence of secular cycles of solar–geo magnetic activity on the global rise in surface air tem perature (global warming) observed over the last sev eral decades [19]. We managed to do this on the basis of the concept of the radiooptical three step trigger mechanism. We analyzed, first, the trends in the main indices of solar and geomagnetic activity and, second, the experimental results of the global distribution of the full (total) cloudiness, obtained from satellites starting from the first half of the 1980s. It turned out that all key effects of the total secular cycle of solar– geomagnetic activity were reflected in the behavior of global cloudiness (Fig. 2). For example, the global cloudiness maximum in 1985–1987 fell on the secular maximum of the Sun’s electromagnetic (1985) and corpuscular (1987) activity [20], while the second maximum (late 2003) coincided with the absolute maximum of geomagnetic activity (the number of geomagnetic storms) over the entire observation HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 279 period (more than 100 years). It is clear from Fig. 2 that the decrease in the global spread of cloudiness after 1987 and 2003 is in full accord, due to the action of the radiooptical mechanism, with the decrease in the Sun’s activity, by the flux in the soft X ray and extreme ultraviolet ranges starting from 1985 (Figs. 3 [21] and 4 [22]), and that in geomagnetic storm activ ity is by the flux of electrons precipitating from radia tion belts starting from 2004 (Fig. 5). Indeed, the decrease in these fluxes reduces the intensity of the ionosphere’s microwave radiation and, consequently, slows down the condensation–cluster process in the troposphere, i.e., cloud generation. This is confirmed by the growth of the water vapor content in the troposphere column, registered in 1986–1999 [23]. Starting from 1999–2000, this value began decreasing again, while the global cloudiness began growing. Importantly, the data of [24] about the rela tion between the lower cloudiness and the upper cloudiness plus the middle ones over the period from 2000 through 2004, when the number of geomagnetic storms was growing up to the absolute secular maxi mum (Fig. 5), show a sharp (two time) increase in the contribution of clouds of the upper and middle levels to the total cloudiness compared to the 1985–1999 period, which is again in full compliance with the increase in the contribution of the radiooptical mech anism to the transformation of water vapors into clus ters under the action of the increased flux of micro waves from the ionosphere. Consequently, in the absence of direct measurement results of the optical thickness of the global cloudiness, the data about the permanent excess of the upper–middle cloudiness over the lower one may be viewed as evidence that the reduction of the total global cloudiness, registered starting from 1987, is primarily determined by the decrease in the number of optically thin (warming) clouds, which determines the decrease in the contri bution of solar–geomagnetic activity effects to the surface air warming. However, it was from 1985–1986 when we observed the considerable increase in the flux of long wave radi ation, going to space from the atmosphere and the underlying surface [25]. Within the concept of the radiooptical mechanism, this confirms the reduction of the optically thin cloudiness, which confines well the Earth’s thermal radiation but almost freely trans mits the principal flux of solar radiant energy. This dif ferentiates it from thick clouds, which confine visible and shortwave radiation coming to the Earth’s tropo sphere and surface. This is why the daytime thick cloudiness is cooling. In [25] we find the following data on the energy evolution of the Earth’s general radiation balance between 1985 and 2003: overall, the growth of outgo ing longwave radiation (OLR) over this period was ~15 W m–2, and the outgoing shortwave radiation Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  6. 6. 280 AVAKYAN Cloudiness, % 71 70 TSI 68 December 2009 69 R 67 1 66 2 65 64 15/07/10 15/07/09 15/07/08 15/07/06 15/07/05 15/07/04 15/07/03 15/07/02 15/07/01 15/07/00 15/07/99 15/07/98 15/07/97 15/07/96 15/07/95 15/07/94 15/07/93 15/07/92 15/07/91 15/07/90 15/07/89 15/07/88 15/07/87 15/07/86 15/07/85 15/07/84 15/07/83 63 15/07/07 4 3 Fig. 2. Remotely sensed changes in the area of global full (summary) cloudiness []. The upper curve is the current course of the solar constant, or the total solar irradiance (TSI). The middle curve is the averaged monthly number of sunspots (R). The lower graph shows monthly averages; the proposed linear approximation in four time inter vals confirms the influence of secular trends in individual factors of solar–geomagnetic activity: the EUV flux and the Sun’s soft X ray radiation, the number of X ray flares, the number of geomagnetic storms, and the impact of their joint reduction after 2003: (1) the period from 1983 to 1985–1987: growing cloudiness owing to the increasing shortwave activity of the Sun and geomagnetic activity (the number of global magnetic storms); (2) the period from 1987 to 2000: the decrease in the Sun’s EUV radiation flux and the number of solar flares; (3) the period from 2000 to 2003: geomagnetic activity growth until the end of 2003; (4) the period from 2004: the general drop in the number of global magnetic storms and solar shortwave electromagnetic activity. mW m−2 6 Sun’s EUV radiation flux 5 Flares 30 4 20 3 10 2 0 1 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 ≥ M4 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2000 Fig. 3. Changes in the current flux of the Sun’s ionizing extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation in 1976–2003. Fig. 4. Time variations in the number of solar X ray flares of ≥M4 observed per month in 1975–2003. (OSR) decreased by ~10 W m–2. This agrees with our estimation of the impact of the radiooptical mecha nism. Indeed, the decrease in overcast skies from the maximum of solar activity in 1985–1987 through 2000 was 4–5% (see Fig. 1). At a mean cloud albedo of 0.5–0.8 and taking into account the Earth’s sphe ricity, 342 W m–2 × (0.04–0.05) × (0.5–0.8) = 6.8– 13.7 W m ⎯2. This is a forecast value by which the value of the outgoing shortwave radiation is reduced. On average, it is just ~10 W m–2, which agrees with the results of satellite data analysis performed in [25]. Therefore, the anomalous growth of the outgoing longwave radiation indicates, in our opinion (in line with the radiooptical mechanism), not a stable global warming, as the author wrote in [25], but, on the con trary, a sharp drop in the contribution of the optically thin cloudiness (which keeps the lower layers of the troposphere) and, consequently, a reduced role of the secular maximum of solar activity to the warming effect. HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  7. 7. Magnetic storms THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING 281 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 75 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 200 70 150 65 60 100 1 55 50 50 0 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1865 1875 1885 1895 1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 Fig. 5. Smoothed monthly numbers of sunspots (upper curve 1), ordinal numbers of 11 year cycles from 11th to 24th, and the annual number of magnetic storms (histogram) []. We should stress that the analysis of the results of perennial ground based measurements of the value of solar radiation that came through the Earth’s atmo sphere allows us to speak not only about its minimum in 1985 but also about the presence (although with a high degree of uncertainty) of a negative centenary trend in its value practically since 1900 [22]. However, this also agrees qualitatively with the secular course of solar–geomagnetic activity. If we consider indirect data as well, then, strictly speaking, warming has already been observed for 300 years, following the growth of solar activity since the beginning of the 17th century. Recent years have seen a change in the direction of another cosmophysical influence on climate—the intensity of the GCRs. The galactic cosmic rays can actively participate in the formation of optically thick clouds of the lower layer, which, as a rule, lead to the cooling of the surface air. Therefore, GCR growth leads to an increase in cooling cloudiness, and, consequently, this process takes part in the weakening of global warm ing [16, 19]. The growth of intensity of cosmic rays has already been observed since about 1999–2000, the last solar maximum (Fig. 6), although until then their flux was decreasing throughout the 20th century. Thus, several trends observed in the past decade may indicate the near end of the period characterized by the contribution of the natural, solar, component to global climate warming [16]. Modern science still does not allow us to forecast with practical accuracy the rate of the coming cooling. This is due to problems with knowledge about the vari ability mechanisms of solar activity. However, the main HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES point is that it is assumed that the heat accumulated by the World Ocean may play a crucial role in the temporal delays of climate variations. The ocean largely affects the atmosphere owing to the latter’s relatively small heat capacity and therefore can hold back the temper ature drop in the surface air by 15–18 years [26]. We have considered the role of a certain initial con dition—the presence of optically dense cloudiness— when solar flares and geomagnetic storms affect weather–climate characteristics [27]. This is a wide spread phenomenon in high and medium latitudes, especially if we keep in mind that we are speaking about densities only slightly exceeding one. The effect of solar flares and geomagnetic storms on the weather is strongly leveled down during such periods in a given region since the genesis of a new thin cloudiness is unnoticeable: the total heat radiation balance is determined (for the ground air) by the optically thick cloud cover. The distribution of this cover is often largely related to the nature of the underlying surface and orography, which is recorded well from space dur 1 ing visual instrumental observations. On the nightside, the whole cloud cover, in fact, slows down the cooling of the ground air layer. This is what probably leads to still poorly understood [3] effects of global climate change, such as the preemptive warming of winters and the prevalence (twofold!) of the growth rates of nightly (minimal) temperatures of the ground air over daytime (maximal) temperatures. The modern climate is surely affected by human activity. The main cause of the growing climate insta bility is the anthropogenic transformation of the Green Earth into the Gray Earth due to the progress Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  8. 8. 282 AVAKYAN % −4 −8 −12 −16 −20 −24 1963 1976 1989 2002 Fig. 6. Average monthly values of cosmic ray variations at the station in Dolgoprudnyi (Moscow oblast) [http://cr0.izmi]. The ordinate axis count starts with the cosmic ray intensity in the 1965 maximum (May June average), inferred for the zero. ing abiotization of dry land [28]. The notion Gray Earth means, among other things, that only half of the forests remain (according to the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), their area will decrease by another 17% by 2050); by the mid 1970s, human interference reduced the dry land phytomass by 41.5%; by the beginning of the 21st century, the critical point of 50% has been passed; and there are forecasts that, in this decade, less than two fifths of the natural phytomass will be left on dry land. The Green Earth used to spend almost 10% of the radiation balance on the biological cycle on dry land, and now, it is 4%; that is, 6.3 W m–2 was released (to the external branch of the geological cycle) outside of the biological cycle. This additional heating of the utilized dry land with a thermal flux of 6.3 W m–2, which passes from the biocycle to the exter nal branch of the geocycle, happens wherever abiotiza tion has reduced the evaporation potential [28]. Indeed, more than 99% of the planetary phytomass is concentrated on dry land. Heat fluxes and surface temperatures grow owing to active degradation pro cesses on territories under development, such as expanding deforestation, desertification, urbaniza tion, the laying of communications and roads, and mining. According to contemporary concepts, the most likely way of reducing carbon emission into the atmosphere is depositing it in forest vegetation through reforestation. The main part (up to 75%) of carbon accumulated in living nature falls on forest ecosystems [29], but we should note that carbon accu mulation through photosynthesis is effective only in relatively young boreal forests, since it takes 100 years on average to occur. In [28] attention is drawn to another discrepancy between the observed features of contemporary warm ing and the greenhouse hypothesis. Indeed, the main greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere is water vapors, but their content drops rapidly with height, where temperature also drops sharply. As for the con tent of all other tropospheric gases, including carbon containing СО2 and СН4, it does not change owing to the full stirring of the homosphere under the heights of 90 km. For some reason, the increase in the concen tration of these anthropogenic components of the greenhouse effect has not affected in any way the warming of the middle and upper parts of the tropo sphere without water vapors over the past decades. Within the concept of the radiooptical mechanism, the role of water vapors is clear; namely, water vapors participate directly in cloud formation, controlled by the factors of solar–geomagnetic activity through the intensity of ionospheric microwave radiation. There fore, experiments show an increase in cloud cover with a parallel decrease in the content of water vapors in the column of the middle and upper parts of the tropo sphere and vice versa, i.e., in direct dependence on the phase of growth or fall in solar activity. Modern urbanization also influences the recorded values of the effect of global warming. In the past three decades, most weather stations of the world (up to 92% according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [26]) have found themselves in urban development areas or close to them. This can add a value to thermometer readings that exceeds 1°С, which is higher than the total effect of global warming observed (about 0.6°С). Moreover, urbanization leads to a decrease in evaporation owing to water discharge into the sewerage, and, for Moscow, this produces an increment of 35 W m–2 in the warm season [26], which is 21 times higher than the virtual greenhouse contri bution of CO2 (1.65 W m–2). In general, urbanization probably has a double effect on the content of water vapors and always toward the temperature increase of the ground air. First, there are no heat inputs for evap oration in a big city (water is drained from asphalted streets into the sewerage); second, heat and power plants, automobiles, etc., produce water vapor during fuel combustion, and the weight of this vapor exceeds the mass of combusted fuel amplifying the greenhouse effect, since water vapor exceeds carbon dioxide in its greenhouse properties by two orders of magnitude. HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  9. 9. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING The comparative quantitative analysis of the ener getics of anthropogenic and natural factors of contem porary climate change shows that the natural compo nent (solar–geomagnetic activity) is more important for its contribution to the radiation balance than the greenhouse effect based on anthropogenic carbon containing gases. Indeed, the value of the Earth’s heat radiation flux outgoing to space has increased by 15 W m–2, which is almost six times larger than the total net effect of greenhouse gases recorded by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change over many years (2.63 W m–2). The main point is that in this case up to 7 W m–2 of additional outgoing long wave radiation (OLR) is formed during the processing into heat of an additional shortwave radiation that in the amount of 10 W m–2 [25] started to penetrate into the lower troposphere after the area of global cloudi ness had decreased. This coefficient of transformation of solar radiation incoming to the Earth (342 W m–2), into the full OLR flux, which had already increased by the beginning of this century from the late 1980s to 240 W m–2, was estimated by the ratio 240/342 = 0.7. The contribution to global climate changes of the solar constant variation (about 0.1%, i.e., 0.3 W m–2) is obviously insignificant against the backdrop of both solar–geomagnetic trends and the growing anthropo genic effect. POSSIBILITIES OF ACCOUNTING FOR SOLAR ACTIVITY IN WEATHER–CLIMATE FORECASTS Now let us consider possibilities of accounting for solar activity in forecasting weather–climate phenom ena in the context of our concept of solar–tropo spheric correlations. We already noted above the quasi periodicity of 2–5.5 years in ground–air tem peratures and precipitation, recorded by meteorolo gists when studying the correlation with Wolf numbers. Within the three step trigger mechanism, this result is quite understandable: the increase of heating (opti cally thin) cloudiness occurs thanks to the growing flux of microwaves from the ionosphere both under the effect of solar flares and during magnetic storms. On the time scale (see Fig. 2), it takes about a year or less to identify the dependence of the correlation in the occurrence of total and lower cloudiness with solar flare and sunspot activity: the middle curve is the monthly averaged number of sunspots; the upper curve is the current course of the solar constant value TSI; and the lower curve and its linear trends are monthly averaged satellite data about the total global cloud cover. It is clear from Fig. 2 that at least intense peaks in the number of sunspots are in anticorrelation with overcast skies, and, in the TSI value (and consequently in the value of the intensity of the ionizing flux of flare fields of the Sun’s photosphere), they are in direct cor HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 283 relation. The revealed picture also corresponds fully to the concept of the radiooptical mechanism effect on overcast occurrence. Then we should state that we can predict changes in the cloud cover area and, conse quently, the Earth’s heat radiation balance with a lead time of several months (proceeding from the known statistics of these formations' lifetime in the Sun’s photosphere) by the number of sunspots and flare fields, as well as identify variations in the temperature of the ground air and precipitation intensity in the interval of the 2.5 to 5 year quasi periods by the dis tribution statistics of large sun flares and global mag netic storms. For the statistics of such events within the 11 year cycle, we can assume that 2–4 years elapse between the maxima of significant sun flares, but, for geomagnetic storms, this period is longer, 2–6 years. Note once again that the physics of the discussed “solar signal” effect on the atmosphere is related to the radiooptical three step trigger mechanism, when microwave radiation, generated by the ionosphere under the factors of amplified solar and geomagnetic activity, regulates the condensation–cluster process of the genesis and further evolution of the cloud cover, including precipitation formation when “seeded” with crystals from the upper layer clouds. However, the main practical results of this work were obtained par ticularly from the analysis of correlations between the totality of ground based and satellite information on weather–climatic characteristics, including cloud occurrence and variations in the Earth’s balance, on the one hand, and the factors of solar–geomagnetic activity, on the other. The authors of [30] believe that the global amount of lower cloudiness is in phase opposition with TSI, and the global distribution of overcast, on the contrary, is in phase with TSI; in other words, it is genetically related to the influence of the ionizing radiation of solar flare fields. Therefore, we may conclude that the middle and upper clouds (in their part that is close to condensation haze and that is still optically thin) weigh heavily upon the lower clouds in reaction to increased solar–geomagnetic activity and, conse quently, to increased ionization in the Earth’s iono sphere with its subsequent generation of microwave radiation. The optically thin cloudiness has maximal potential to contribute both to the heating effect of the atmospheric air (if the cloudiness is abundant as dur ing the maximal solar–geomagnetic activity) and to the phenomenon of passage (exit) of the Earth’s heat radiation to space (during the decrease in the area of optically thin clouds in the recent epoch of recession in solar activity in the secular cycle). We stress that the influence of heliogeophysical activity and ionospheric disturbance on weather–cli matic characteristics is an interdisciplinary problem, and meteorologists, even together with geographers, are unable to solve it. Here is an example of a wide Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  10. 10. 284 AVAKYAN spread mistake. Many meteorological and geographi cal publications about the nature of global climatic variations consider the known astronomical effects (for instance, orbital variations and the trend of the Earth’s rotation speed, as well as changes in the solar system’s position in the Galaxy). Note that astronom ical (orbital) effects can really be interesting in terms of the Earth’s climate on a long period scale (from 103 to 106 years). For shorter periods, the Earth’s position relative to other planets, including the giant planets of Jupiter and Saturn, is taken into account. However, for the above gravitational solar–planetary effects, there is the hypothesis of the resonance structure of the solar system [31], which is most evident in the variability of solar activity (the number of powerful flares). It fol lows from this hypothesis that a nonlinear oscillating system, like the Sun and its planets during their suffi ciently long dynamic evolution, tries to reach a syn chronous regime in which the frequencies of individ ual processes (for example, solar flare activity or changes in various parameters of the planetary system) are in simple multiple relations among themselves. For example, the influence of the periodic movement of the planets on solar flares, which seems insignificant owing to the small energy of gravitational interaction between the planetary system and the Sun compared to the ener getics of solar activity, has a deep physical cause. Reso nant vectors in the solar system, defined in [31], corre spond to those identified by statistical processing of perennial data on the distribution of solar flares in a year by the number of recorded solar cosmic rays in more than 1000 cases [32]. We may state that the positions of giant planets manifest themselves in the statistical tem poral distribution of moments of increased solar activ ity, and there is no need to look for ways of individual accounting for these astronomical effects. We should stress that the development of the phys ical mechanism of influence of solar and geomagnetic activity factors on weather–climatic characteristics may become a clue to the methods of human control of weather and climate. The results given in this article contradict the fash ion of exaggerating the role of human interference in nature within short—several decades—periods. Let us recall the “ozone problem”: in the 1970s the cause of a hole in the stratospheric ozone layer over Antarc tic was linked to Freon discharges. In reality, the ratio between the contribution of Freon and natural chan nels of ozone destruction has not been fully measured for the simple reason that the Montreal agreements limiting Freon production and use were implemented by the world community before the first direct mea surements of concentrations of chlorine compounds in the stratosphere at the heights of the ozone maxi mum. At the same time, the Soviet cosmonauts them selves saw high, stratospheric clouds right in the area of Antarctic in 1978 [33]. Heterogeneous reactions (on the surface of ice particles of these clouds) lead to the acceleration of reactions that kill ozone molecules by several orders of magnitude. The increase in the polar stratospheric cloud cover in the late 1970s and the first half of the 1980s agrees well with the analytical results in this article concerning that satellite informa tion on global cloud distribution that has been received in state of the art space experiments since 1983. Thus, in 1985–1987, during the latest secular maxi mum of solar electromagnetic–corpuscular activity, the most significant occurrence of clouds of all types was observable over the globe. Within our concept of the influence of the main factors of solar–geomag netic activity on cloud formation processes, this is linked right to the passage through the total secular maximum of clearly manifested quasi centenary and quasi bicentenary cycles of solar activity. It is hard to assume that the latest secular maximum in solar activ ity, which fell on the period when the ozone hole was recorded, did not affect the genesis of stratospheric polar clouds. So, the analysis of the situation with the physical causes of another, climatic, “problem of the century” allows the scientific community to focus on the need for an all round study of primarily natural causes of global changes in the environment. The decision of the Russian Security Council to establish the interdepartmental Climate Research Center in St. Petersburg appears to be important. In early 2011, the Commission for the Physical Problems of Recent Climate Change started to work at the Research Council on Ecology and Natural Resources under the RAS Research Center in St. Petersburg and prepared a composite package of proposals for the National Climate Program. Taking into account the great scientific potential of St. Petersburg, including the entities of the Federal Service for Hydrometeorol ogy and Environmental Monitoring (Rosgidromet) and academic research institutes, such as the Chief (Pulkovo) Astronomical Observatory, the Physicote chnical Institute, and the branch of the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, the Ionosphere, and Radio Wave Propagation, we may expect to produce scien tific rationales for intergovernmental agreements, including Russia’s participation in the Kyoto Proto col, which was suspended in 2012. REFERENCES 1. Proc. First All Union Conference “Solar–Atmospheric Correlations in Climate Theory and Weather Forecasts” (Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1974) [in Russian]. 2. S. V. Avakyan, “Optics in the global changes of environ ment,” Armen. J. Phys. 2 (1) (2009). 3. K. Ya. Kondrat’ev and L. S. Ivlev, Climatology of Aero sols and Cloudiness (VVM, St. Petersburg, 2008) [in Russian]. 4. V. L. Krauklis, G. A. Nikol’skii, M. M. Safronova, and E. O. Shul’ts, “On the conditions under which the HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 83 No. 3 2013
  11. 11. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. anomalous extinction of the UV radiation by aerosol can occur in clear atmosphere,” Opt. Atmos. 3 (3), 227 (1990). G. A. Nikol’skii and E. O. Shul’ts, “Spectral and tem poral variations of the residual extinction in the near UV Region,” Opt. Atmos. 4 (9), 961 (1991). V. S. Troitskii, A. M. Starodubtsev, L. N. Bondar’, et al., “Search for sporadic radio emission from space at cen timeter and decimeter wavelengths,” Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz. 16 (3) (1973). S. V. Avakyan, A. E. Serova, and, N. A. Voronin “The role of Rydberg atoms and molecules in the upper atmosphere,” Geomagn. Aeron. 37 (3), 331 (1997). S. M. Grach, V. M. Fridman, L. M. Lifshits, et al., “Decimeter electromagnetic radiation stimulated by shortwave heating of the atmosphere,” in Proc. XX All Russia Conference on Radio Wave Propagation, (Nizhni Novgorod, 2002) [in Russian]. S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “Possible mecha nisms for the influence of heliogeophysical activity on the biosphere and the weather,” J. Opt. Technol. 73 (4), 281 (2006). V. I. Vernadsky, Scientific Thought As a Planetary Phe nomenon (Nauka, Moscow, 1991) [in Russian]. D. R. Bates, “Electron–ion recombination in an ambi ent molecular gas,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 14 (18), 3525 (1981). A. A. Dmitriev and T. Yu. Lomakina, “Cloud cover and space X ray radiation,” in Solar Activity Effects in the Lower Atmosphere (Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1977) [in Russian]. K. Ya. Kondrat’ev and V. I. Binenko, “Cirrus clouds, radiation, and climate,” in Science and Technology Results, Ser. Meteorology and Climatology (VINITI, Moscow, 1988), Vol. 18 [in Russian]. E. P. Borisenkov, T. A. Bazlova, and L. N. Efimova, Cir rus Cover and Its Influence on Atmospheric Processes (Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1989) [in Russian]. V. N. Kolesnikova and A. S. Monin, “Spectra of micrometeorological, synoptic, and climatic oscilla tions of meteorological fields,” in Meteorological Research, General Circulation of the Earth’s Atmosphere (Nauka, Moscow, 1968), Vol. 16, pp. 30–57 [in Rus sian]. S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “On the radiooptical and optical mechanisms of influence of cosmic factors on the global warming,” J. Opt. Technol. 77 (2), 141 (2010). R. E. Benestad, Solar Activity and Earth’s Climate (Springer Praxis, 2002). V. A. Rumyantsev and Yu. A. Trapeznikov, “Grounding of forming mechanism for short term climatic cycles of hydrometeorological processes,” Izv. Russ. Geogr. Obshch. 144 (3), 9 (2012). S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “The role of space and ionospheric disturbances in the global climate 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. change and pipeline corrosion,” Izv., Atm. Oceanic Phys. 47 (9), 1143 (2011). M. Lockwood and C. Frohlich, “Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature,” in Proc. R. Soc. Lon don, Ser. A (2007). doi 10.1098/r5sspa.2007.1880 J. Lean, “Living with a variable sun,” Phys. Today, No. 6, 35 (2005). A. Belov, H. Garcia, V. Kurt, and E. Mavromichalaki, “Proton events and X ray flares in the last three solar cycles,” Cosm. Res. 43 (3), 165 (2005). V. N. Aref’ev, F. V. Kashin, V. K. Semenov, et al., “Water vapor in the atmosphere over the northern Tien Shan,” Izv. Atm. Oceanic Phys. 42 (6), 739 (2006). P. R. Good and E. Palle, “Shortwave forcing of the Earth’s climate: Modern and historical variations in the sun’s irradiance and the Earth’s reflectance,” J. Atm. Sol. Terr. Phys. 69 (13), 1556 (2007). V. A. Golovko, “Global redistribution of components of the Earth’s radiation balance,” Issled. Zemli Kos mosa, No. 5 (2003). O. M. Pokrovskii, “Climate: Myths and reality,” Gos. Upravlenie Resursami, No. 1(55) (2010). S. V. Avakyan, “Channels of cosmophysical factors influence on the weather and climate characteristics,” in Proc. All Russia Annual Conference on Solar Physics “Solar and Solar–Terrestrial Physics 2010.” October 3– 9, 2010 (GAO, St. Petersburg, 2010) [in Russian]. S. P. Gorshkov, “Causes of global warming and increased climate instability: Possible countermeasures off the Kyoto Protocol,” in Sustainable Development: Problems and Prospects, Vol. 4: Rational Nature Man agement: International Programs, Russian and Foreign Practices (KMK, Moscow, 2010) [in Russian]. N. B. Leonova and G. N. Ogureeva, “Forest vegetation of the temperate zone under global environmental changes,” in Recent Global Changes in the Natural Envi ronment (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2006), Vol. 2 [in Rus sian]. J. E. Kristjansson, J. Kristiansen, and E. Kaas, “Solar activity, cosmic rays, clouds, and climate—an update,” Adv. in Space Res. 34, 407 (2004). doi 10.1016/j.asr.2003.02.040 A. M. Molchanov, “Resonanses in multifrequency oscillations,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 168 (2), 284 (1966). V. P. Kozelov and G. I. Mingaleva, “Anisotropy of solar flare activity in the inertial space and the resonance ability of the solar system,” in Substorms and Excita tions in the Magnetosphere (Nauka, Leningrad, 1975), pp. 264–274 [in Russian]. A. I. Lazarev, V. V. Kovalenok, and S. V. Avakyan, Stud ies of the Earth from Piloted Spaceships (Gidrometeoiz dat, Leningrad, 1987) [in Russian]. Translated by B. Alekseev SPELL: 1. orography HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 285 Vol. 83 No. 3 2013