05/31/2026 – Climate- Science.press

The Sun is Getting Skin-Deep: Helioseismology Reveals Solar Cycle Changes Becoming Increasingly Shallow

Recent research using helioseismology (“listening” to the Sun) has revealed that solar magnetic activity and structural changes are becoming increasingly confined to shallow layers just beneath the surface, differing from what traditional surface observations (like sunspot counts) suggest.

Solar cycles basics: The Sun follows roughly 11-year cycles of rising and falling magnetic activity, marked by sunspots, flares, and coronal mass ejections. Activity affects space weather, which can impact satellites, power grids, and communications on Earth.

New insights from sound waves: Scientists analyzed nearly 40 years of data (spanning solar cycles 22–25, from ~1987 onward) from the Birmingham Solar Oscillations Network (BiSON). They studied p-mode oscillations—global sound waves (acoustic pressure waves) trapped inside the Sun whose frequencies shift in response to magnetic activity and structural changes.

The hidden shift: Over recent cycles (especially since Cycle 23), solar-cycle-driven changes appear to be “squeezed” into shallower layers near the surface. High-frequency p-modes (probing these shallow regions) show the current Cycle 25 as strong or comparable to earlier strong cycles (22 and 23). However, surface proxies like sunspots and radio flux suggest a weaker cycle.

Implication: The Sun’s “active biorhythm” may be evolving over decades. Magnetic activity and associated structural changes are increasingly shallow, creating a mismatch between interior signals and visible surface activity. This points to longer-term behavioral changes rather than just cycle-to-cycle variation.

Traditional monitoring relies on surface features, which may now underrepresent the full internal dynamics. This could improve space weather prediction if the trends hold. The underlying cause isn’t fully understood—it isn’t simply weaker overall magnetic fields—and it raises questions about whether the Sun is entering a “different mode of behavior.”

Helioseismic p-mode frequency shifts are a key diagnostic in solar physics. They reveal how the Sun’s interior structure and magnetic activity evolve over the ~11-year solar cycle, often in ways not fully captured by surface observations like sunspots.

What Are p-Modes?

p-modes (pressure modes) are acoustic waves — essentially standing sound waves — trapped inside the Sun. Pressure (sound speed) provides the main restoring force.

They are excited by turbulent convection near the surface.
Typical periods are ~3–6 minutes (frequencies ~1,500–5,000 μHz, with peak power around 3,000 μHz, the “5-minute oscillations”).
Low-degree (low-l) modes are global and observable in “Sun-as-a-star” data; higher-degree modes allow more localized probing.
Waves propagate inward, refract due to increasing sound speed with depth, and return to the surface. Lower-frequency modes penetrate deeper; higher-frequency modes are more sensitive to shallow subsurface layers.

The Sun acts as a resonant cavity, supporting millions of such modes.

Why Do Frequencies Shift with Solar Activity?

p-mode frequencies increase slightly (by ~0.1–0.5 μHz or fractions of a percent) as solar magnetic activity rises. This is one of the earliest robust findings in helioseismology.

Main causes (near-surface effects dominate):

Solar Activity: Direct (Lorentz force) and indirect (via structural changes like altered sound speed or density). Perturbations in the mean-square magnetic field in the photosphere/sub-photosphere are a leading candidate.
Thermal/entropy changes: Alter propagation speed and effective path length. These can produce opposing contributions to frequency shifts.
The shifts are strongest near the surface (upper ~ few thousand km), where magnetic activity is concentrated. Higher-frequency modes show larger relative shifts because they spend more time in these shallow layers.

Frequency shifts correlate tightly with activity proxies (e.g., 10.7-cm radio flux F10.7, sunspot number SSN) but can diverge when subsurface dynamics change.

There is a study published by researchers at the University of Birmingham (with collaborators including Yale) and published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society in late May 2026.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Subsurface structural changes associated with successive 11-yr solar activity cycles have been progressively more confined near the surface: new helioseismic results on Cycles 22–25 from BiSON

This is the title of a new research paper published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (MNRAS) on May 28, 2026, led by William J. Chaplin (University of Birmingham) with collaborators including Sarbani Basu (Yale).

Using nearly 40 years of “Sun-as-a-star” helioseismic data from the Birmingham Solar Oscillations Network (BiSON) (1987–2025, covering solar cycles 22 through 25), the team found that subsurface structural changes linked to the ~11-year solar activity cycle have become progressively more confined to shallow layers just beneath the Sun’s visible surface (photosphere).

Magnetic activity and associated structural perturbations are increasingly “squeezed” into a thinner skin near the surface (on the order of ~1,000 km or less in recent cycles), rather than extending deeper as in earlier cycles.

Methodology: Helioseismology with p-modes

p-modes (acoustic pressure waves) are global sound waves trapped inside the Sun. Their frequencies shift in response to magnetic activity and near-surface structural changes.
Researchers analyzed frequency shifts in three bands:
- Low-frequency (~1,860–2,400 μHz): Probes deeper layers.
- Mid-frequency (~2,400–2,920 μHz).
- High-frequency (~2,920–3,450 μHz): Most sensitive to very shallow subsurface layers.
These were compared to traditional surface activity proxies: 10.7-cm radio flux (F10.7) and sunspot number (SSN).

Key observations from the data:

Changes in the low-frequency modes (noted starting in Cycle 23) persisted into Cycle 25, indicating structural shifts in shallower layers than in Cycle 22.
Mid-frequency sensitivity to activity decreased over Cycles 23–25 compared to Cycle 22.
High-frequency modes in Cycle 25 showed much stronger shifts than expected from surface proxies. Cycle 25 appears as strong as Cycles 22/23 in this shallow-probing band, while surface indicators (sunspots, radio flux) show it as noticeably weaker (~25% weaker peak than Cycle 22 in some measures).

Implications

This suggests a long-term evolution in how the Sun’s magnetic dynamo operates, with activity becoming more “skin-deep” over decades. It is not simply due to overall weaker fields but a reorganization of where magnetic activity is stored and manifests subsurface.
Traditional surface-based monitoring and space weather models (calibrated on deeper activity patterns) may need updating.
The Sun may be entering a “different mode of behavior.” Continued BiSON observations into Cycle 26 will be key to confirming if this is a sustained trend.

The paper is short (5 pages) and available on arXiv (2605.29528). It builds on earlier BiSON work by the same team that first noted divergences starting in Cycle 23.

This highlights the unique value of long-term helioseismology in revealing interior dynamics invisible to surface observations.

Published: Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stag847

Authors: William J Chaplin,

ABSTRACT

We use Sun-as-a-star helioseismology data, collected by the Birmingham Solar-Oscillations Network, to examine the relationship between the solar-cycle-induced frequency shifts of whole-Sun, low-angular degree solar p modes and well-known proxies of global solar activity.

Changes in behaviour between the low-frequency modes and proxies, which in a previous study we found had occurred on the declining phase of Cycle 23, appear to have persisted into Cycle 25.

More striking is a significant change in the relationship for higher-frequency modes, which the new Cycle 25 data now reveal.

The observed mean frequency shifts in Cycle 25 are much stronger than one would expect for these modes based on the relationship between the frequencies and proxies seen in previous cycles, in particular Cycle 22.

In sum, Cycle 25 is as strong as Cycles 22 and 23 when observed in this higher-frequency seismic band, in marked contrast to the relative sizes of the cycles seen in the global activity proxies, where Cycle 25 is noticeably weaker.

When considered alongside a systematic reduction of the sensitivity of the mid-frequency modes to activity over the past three cycles, these results suggest that subsurface structural changes associated with successive 11-yr cycles are becoming ever more progressively confined just beneath the solar surface.

Inside Vladimir Putin’s Quest for Eternal Youth

Vladimir Putin, now 73, has spearheaded a major Russian state-backed longevity program called “New Health Preservation Technologies,” unveiled in 2024 with a reported budget of around $26 billion. This initiative focuses on anti-aging research, including gene therapy, bioprinting (3D-printing living tissue), xenotransplantation (growing human-compatible organs in animals), cryotherapy, and related technologies. It aims to extend healthy lifespan, with official claims of saving 175,000 lives by 2030.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Just how close are the super rich to achieving medical immortality?

Inside Putin’s $26 Billion Quest for Longevity

From mini-pigs and organ printing to cryotherapy and genetics, Russia’s president has turned antiaging research into a Kremlin priority

By Bojan Pancevski
May 28, 2026 at 8:00 pm ET

When Vladimir Putin was captured by a hot mic telling Xi Jinping that humans could achieve immortality by replacing their organs, some dismissed the exchange as eccentric small talk between aging autocrats.

In fact, during the conversation at a Beijing military parade last September, Putin appeared to be describing a Kremlin-backed longevity initiative that has become one of Russia’s flagship scientific projects.

Like Silicon Valley billionaires including Jeff Bezos, Sam Altman and Peter Thiel, Putin has long been fascinated with antiaging research. But in Russia, Putin’s quest to stave off decline is now a state priority relying on methods as wide-ranging as organ printing, harvesting mini-pigs and exposure to ultralow temperatures.

Last month, Russia’s government announced that scientists are developing a gene-therapy treatment aimed at slowing cellular aging as part of “New Health Preservation Technologies,” Putin’s $26 billion longevity initiative.

…Read more: https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/putin-longevity-antiaging-92dee6e8

What Putin and Xi were allegedly talking about, replacing worn out organs – plenty of people have had organ transplants, and received a new lease of life. But I’ve never seen credible research which suggests aggressive organ replacement extends lifespan, other than the obvious benefits of replacing an organ which has ceased to function properly. But perhaps this is because nobody has attempted to replace all their organs, at least all the organs which are replaceable.

The immune suppression therapies which accompany organ transplantation carry their own risks. I have a friend whose daughter is currently in an out of hospital after a major organ transplant, the doctors are really struggling to get the anti-rejection drug therapy right. And when they do get it right, my friend’s daughter will have to live with a lifelong reduction in her resistance to cancer, the anti-rejection drugs which help the body accept transplanted organs reduce the body’s ability to recognise abnormal cancer cells.

It’s not just dictators who are playing the life extension game. Google may have been early entrants to the game of unlocking the secret of eternal youth. In 2012 futurist and pioneering machine learning expert Ray Kurzweil was appointed to help Google master language processing, which raised a number of eyebrows in the high tech industry. Kurzweil is a legendary machine learning expert – he first appeared on CBS in 1965 at the age of 17 to display his machine learning skills, and is still going strong. But Kurzweil is also a major advocate of the technological singularity and transhumanism movement, and has repeatedly expressed a strong interest in medical life extension. Perhaps his duties at Google go beyond helping to advance their language processing technology.

Kurzweil estimates AI will exceed human intelligence in the early 2040s, and very much wants to be around to see this happen. His prediction is looking a lot more likely now than when he originally made this prediction in 1999, in his book The Age of Spiritual Machines.

Of course, nobody with the money or the resources is waiting around for super intelligent machines to make such technology available to the masses – they want to punch through, use their billions of dollars or in Russia’s case the resources of an entire nation to compress decades of medical advances into an injection they can receive sometime next week.

Before you dismiss it all as ridiculous, there are genuine scientific hints that greater longevity may be possible, and that the first breakthroughs may not be that far in the future.

Caloric restriction is something which can be done right now. Something strange happens to the body when you reduce food consumption to the equivalent of one cheeseburger per day – everything seems to slow down. Rats, hamsters, even monkeys given caloric restriction diets tend to live significantly longer and have less health problems than their fatter cousins. But before you rush to empty your freezer, this kind of extreme diet, bringing your body to the brink of death by starvation, carries substantial risks. Such diets require constant medical supervision to ensure you don’t tip over into a life threatening health crisis. You have to be born with the right genes – not everyone’s body can take this kind of abuse.

So please have a long chat to your doctor before attempting anything like this. More information is available on this US government web page.

Obviously life would be a lot more fun if you could have the benefits of caloric restriction without having to starve yourself. One of the most interesting breakthroughs comes close to achieving this – a small genetic tweak which promotes production of PEPCK-C in muscle tissue.

From the US Government national library of medicine;

Born to run; the story of the PEPCK-C^mus mouse^{^*}

Richard W Hanson ¹, Parvin Hakimi ¹

Author information

Article notes

Copyright and License information

PMCID: PMC2491496 NIHMSID: NIHMS55747 PMID: 18394430

The publisher’s version of this article is available at Biochimie

Abstract

In order to study the role of the cytosolic form of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (GTP) (EC 4.1.1.32) (PEPCK-C) in skeletal muscle, PEPCK-C^mus mice were created by introducing the cDNA for the enzyme, linked to the human α-skeletal actin gene promoter, into their germ line. Two founder lines generated by this procedure were bred together, creating a line of mice that have 9.0 units/g skeletal muscle, as compared to 0.080 units/g in muscle from control animals. The mice were more active than controls in their cages and could run for up to 5 km, at a speed of 20 m/min without stopping (control mice run for 0.2 km at the same speed). Male PEPCK-C^mus mice are extremely aggressive, as well as hyperactive. During strenuous exercise, they use fatty acids as a fuel more efficiently than do controls and produce far less lactate than do control animals, perhaps due to the greatly increased number of mitochondria in their skeletal muscle. PEPCK-C^mus mice also store up to five-times more triglyceride in their skeletal muscle but have only marginal amounts of triglyceride in their adipose tissue depots, despite eating 60% more than controls. The concentration of leptin and insulin the blood of 8 to 12 month of PEPCK-C^mus mice is far lower than noted in the blood of control animals of the same age. These mice live longer than controls and the females remain reproductively active for as long as 35 months. The possible reasons for the profound alteration in activity and longevity caused the introduction of a simple metabolic enzyme into the skeletal muscle of the mice will be discussed.

Read more: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2491496/

PEPCK-C helps the body convert fat into glucose. In most mammals, including humans, this is a slow and limited process – humans in particular have bodies optimised to surviving long periods of starvation, so our body is full of limit switches which help tear down unnecessary muscle, restrict our energy levels, fill our muscles with lactic acid when we exercise, and take many other steps to discourage us from burning fat stores.

Mice also have such limit switches. The results of disabling this particular limit switch in lab mice were extraordinary – not only did the mice live longer, but they could run for hours without getting winded. And that lactic acid buildup which causes muscle pain after exercise was barely present in the tissues of the modified lab mice.

The following is a video of an ordinary mouse alongside a PEPCK-C super-mouse.

There was a side effect – the modified mice were hyper aggressive. Star trek fans would immediately think of the fictional character Khan – a genetically modified superman with extraordinary fighting ability, who almost stole the Starship Enterprise from Captain Kirk. But if you’re super rich or an evil dictator, maybe the thought of becoming even more aggressive towards everyone else would seem a small price to pay for a longer time walking among the living.

Before you rush out and demand your shot of PEPCK-C pep juice, so far the effect has only been demonstrated in lab animals which were modified as embryos. Nobody knows how to retrofit such a genetic tweak to adults, in mice or humans.

The impact on society and the global balance of power of a substantial longevity breakthrough such as a PEPCK-C treatment which works on adults would be profound. Not only would all the super-rich start living longer, agents of whoever developed such a longevity treatment would have a powerful new lever to influence others. An offer of a pill or injection which provides an extra 25 years of good health and boundless physical endurance in return for betraying country or government would buy a lot of souls.

In conclusion, we just don’t know how close the super rich and powerful are to lengthening their own lives. But given tantalising medical hints that life extension is possible, that drastically improved quality of life in old age is possible, given that the adjustment required to achieve the first step on this path is simple – increase the expression of a single peptide – and given the gathering synergy of artificial intelligence and medical science, my prediction in the next decade we’ll start to see a handful of super-rich and powerful people looking ridiculously healthy well beyond their time, achieving at least limited success in their quest for personal immortality.

New Nonlinear Model Predicts Possible Global Population Halving by 2064 in Major Crisis Scenario

There is a recent open-access paper (May 2026) by Alessio Zaccone (University of Milan) with the late Kostya Trachenko, published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals.

The study proposes a single nonlinear differential equation (sometimes called the Trachenko-Zaccone or TZ equation) that unifies ~12,000 years of global human population data across different historical growth regimes.

There is a recent open-access paper (May 2026) by Alessio Zaccone (University of Milan) with the late Kostya Trachenko, published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals.

The study proposes a single nonlinear differential equation (sometimes called the Trachenko-Zaccone or TZ equation) that unifies ~12,000 years of global human population data across different historical growth regimes.

It generalizes classical models like:

Malthusian exponential growth (constant growth rate).
Verhulst logistic growth (S-shaped curve approaching a carrying capacity).
Von Foerster “doomsday” hyperbolic growth (which once predicted a singularity around 2026 but diverged from later data).
Stretched- and compressed-exponential behaviors observed in different epochs.

The equation models the per-capita growth rate as depending nonlinearly on population size via an exponential feedback term, originally inspired by physics of disordered systems (e.g., relaxation in glasses).

This is not a central prediction or baseline forecast—it’s a deliberately conservative worst-case illustrative scenario.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Global population crisis scenarios predicted by a general nonlinear dynamical model

The paper titled “Global population crisis scenarios predicted by a general nonlinear dynamical model” (Zaccone & Trachenko, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 2026; arXiv:2502.19063) introduces a unified mathematical framework for ~12,000 years of human population dynamics and explores hypothetical future crisis scenarios.

The Model: Trachenko-Zaccone (TZ) or Rate-Feedback Equation

The core is a single nonlinear differential equation inspired by physics of disordered systems (e.g., relaxation in glasses):

$frac{dy}{dt} = frac{y}{tau} exp(K y)$ frac{dy}{dt} = frac{y}{tau} exp(K y)

(where (y) is normalized population size in each regime,

$tau$ tau is a time constant, and (K) is a key dimensionless feedback parameter).

K > 0: Compressed-exponential growth (accelerating, super-exponential).
K < 0: Stretched-exponential growth (slowing but still growing).
Limits recover classical models:
- Malthusian exponential (constant rate).
- Verhulst logistic (S-shaped, approaching carrying capacity).
- von Foerster hyperbolic “doomsday” (singularity).

It fits historical data across regimes (Neolithic slow growth, industrial acceleration, recent slowing) better than piecemeal classical models, without needing explicit delays or piecewise rules.

The parameter (K) lumps complex social, economic, technological, and environmental feedbacks. Its sign and magnitude determine whether growth accelerates or decelerates.

Nonlinear dynamics refers to systems where the rules of change (rates) depend in a non-proportional, often multiplicative or exponential way on the current state. This leads to rich behaviors impossible in linear systems: tipping points, bifurcations, chaos, sudden regime shifts, multiple stable states, and extreme sensitivity to initial conditions or parameters.

This single equation recovers many classical models as approximations and unifies stretched-exponential, exponential, and compressed-exponential regimes observed across 12,000 years of human history.

Visual exploration of the TZ model (simulated numerically):

(Positive K leads to very rapid acceleration; negative K produces slower, saturating-like growth.)

Nonlinear models are standard in ecology and demography because real populations interact with resources, competitors, predators, and their own density in complex ways.

Classic examples include:

Logistic growth (Verhulst): Introduces carrying capacity — a nonlinear term that caps growth.
Lotka-Volterra predator-prey: Oscillatory cycles from nonlinear interaction terms.
Delay differential equations or age-structured models: Can produce chaos even in simple systems.

Nonlinearity explains why small changes (e.g., a shift in K due to technology, climate, or policy) can flip a system from stable growth to rapid decline or overshoot.

Crisis Scenarios

The paper emphasizes illustrative “what-if” explorations, not probabilistic forecasts:

Worst-case crisis now (carrying capacity shock): Assume a major disruption (severe climate impacts, resource collapse, pandemics, conflict) abruptly reduces Earth’s effective carrying capacity to ~2 billion. The model then predicts a rapid decline, with global population halving (roughly from ~8+ billion to ~4 billion) by around 2064. This is described as a deliberately conservative worst-case to illustrate sensitivity.
Unchecked growth scenario: Continuing current trends without strong constraints leads to accelerating growth and a potential unsustainable “singularity” (mathematical blow-up) around 2078, updating earlier doomsday predictions.

The model highlights (K) as a monitorable control parameter for steering away from extremes.

Key Caveats from the Authors and Context

These are mathematical sensitivity analyses, not predictions. Real population dynamics involve fertility rates, mortality, migration, technology, policy, and culture—far more complex than one equation.
Mainstream projections (UN, etc.) expect a mid-century peak (~9.7–10.4 billion) followed by gradual decline due to falling fertility, without sudden crashes.
The 2064 halving requires an abrupt, severe drop in sustainable capacity starting immediately—extreme but useful for highlighting risks.
Strengths: Elegant unification of historical regimes. Weaknesses: Highly sensitive to assumptions about future (K) and carrying capacity; simplified feedback.

The work serves as a call for sustainability and monitoring aggregated feedback signals. For full details, read the open-access paper (arXiv or journal). It builds on prior demographic modeling but stands out for its compact, physics-inspired generality.

Published: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2026.118542

Authors: Alessio Zaccone and
Kostya Trachenko

Abstract

We show that a simple nonlinear differential equation (originally studied in the physics of disordered systems) mathematically describes key regimes of global population growth over the past 12000 years.

Different growth regimes since the early Neolithic until the present can be interpreted within a single nonlinear rate-feedback equation in appropriate limits.

These include the well-known Malthus (exponential) and Verhulst (logistic) growth laws, as well as von Foerster-type hyperbolic growth as a controlled low-order truncation.

While older models may provide valid fits to limited time intervals, their approximate nature prevents them from being predictive over longer periods of time.

The proposed framework provides a compact analytical setting to explore future scenarios, including a deliberately conservative, worst-case illustration in which the global population could halve as early as 2064 if carrying-capacity constraints became abruptly active today.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

UN World Population Prospects (2024 Revision) vs. Zaccone-Trachenko (TZ) Nonlinear Model

UN Projections (Medium Variant, 2024 Revision)

The UN uses detailed cohort-component methods incorporating age/sex structures, fertility, mortality, and migration data from censuses, surveys, and vital records.

Current (2024): ~8.2 billion.
2050: ~9.7 billion.
Peak: ~10.3 billion in the mid-2080s (around 2084).
2100: ~10.2 billion (slight decline after peak).
Trajectory: Continued but slowing growth for ~60 years, followed by a gradual decline driven by falling fertility rates (global total fertility rate declining toward ~1.8 by 2100). No sudden crash.
Key Drivers: Demographic transition (lower fertility from education, urbanization, women’s empowerment, access to contraception). Sub-Saharan Africa drives much of the remaining growth; many countries (especially in Europe, East Asia) have already peaked or will soon.
Uncertainty: High probability (~80%) of peaking this century, but variants range based on faster/slower fertility changes.

The UN emphasizes probabilistic scenarios and does not assume abrupt global catastrophes.

Zaccone-Trachenko (TZ) Model

This is a single nonlinear ODE inspired by physics (disordered systems):

$frac{dy}{dt} = frac{y}{tau} exp(K y)$ frac{dy}{dt} = frac{y}{tau} exp(K y)

It unifies historical regimes (Malthusian, logistic, hyperbolic, stretched/compressed exponential) via the feedback parameter K and applies to normalized population in different eras.

Scenarios (illustrative sensitivity analyses, not central forecasts):

Crisis scenario (abrupt carrying capacity drop to ~2 billion today due to severe ecological/resource crisis): Rapid decline, population halving (~4 billion loss) by ~2064.
Unchecked growth: Continued acceleration potentially leading to a “doomsday”-style instability/singularity around 2078.

The model highlights nonlinearity and sensitivity to feedback/K, serving as a “what-if” tool rather than a detailed demographic forecast.

Direct Comparison

Near-term (to 2050): Similar broad growth, but TZ crisis scenario diverges sharply downward if limits activate immediately.
Mid-century (2060s): UN sees continued rise toward ~10 billion. TZ worst-case sees halving (to ~4 billion) under catastrophe.
Late century (2080s–2100): UN peaks at ~10.3B then gentle decline to ~10.2B. TZ unchecked scenario risks overshoot/collapse; crisis scenario is already in deep decline.
Methodology:
- UN: Bottom-up, data-rich, country-specific, incorporates gradual behavioral/socioeconomic changes. Conservative on shocks.
- TZ: Top-down, elegant single-equation unification of 12,000 years of data. Strong for capturing regime shifts and nonlinear feedbacks, but simplified (no detailed demographics, regional variation, or policy responses).
Nature of Outputs: UN = trend-based projections assuming continuation of observed transitions. TZ = mathematical exploration of extremes under sudden carrying-capacity shocks.

Strengths, Limitations, and Interpretation

UN strengths: Granular, empirically grounded in fertility/mortality trends, widely used for policy. Recent revisions have lowered peaks due to faster fertility declines (e.g., in China).
TZ strengths: Compact, captures historical nonlinearity better than classical single models; warns of potential instability if feedbacks turn strongly negative.
Shared insight: Both acknowledge risks from resource/environmental pressures. TZ dramatizes abrupt shocks; UN assumes more adaptive, gradual change.
Key difference: The 2064 “crash” requires an extreme, immediate global crisis reducing effective carrying capacity dramatically — not the baseline in either model. Without that, mainstream views align more with gradual peaking/decline.

Comparison to Zaccone-Trachenko (TZ) Nonlinear Model

Aspect	UN 2024 Medium Projection	TZ Model (Illustrative Scenarios)
Near-term (to 2050)	~9.7 billion, continued growth	Similar growth unless crisis triggers early
2060s	Approaching ~10 billion	Worst-case crisis: Halving to ~4 billion by ~2064 (under abrupt carrying capacity drop to ~2B)
Peak	~10.3 billion in mid-2080s (2084)	No peak in unchecked scenario; acceleration toward potential instability ~2078
Long-term (2100)	~10.2 billion (gentle decline)	Crisis scenario: deep decline; unchecked: overshoot/collapse risk
Methodology	Detailed cohort-component (fertility, mortality, migration, age structure)	Single nonlinear ODE unifying 12k years of history via feedback parameter K
Nature	Probabilistic baseline trends	Sensitivity analysis / “what-if” extremes

Interpretation

UN view (mainstream consensus): Gradual demographic transition leads to a peak then slow decline. No sudden crash. The image highlights how UN projections are becoming more conservative as real-world fertility falls faster than expected.
TZ model: Complements by highlighting nonlinear risks. Its dramatic 2064 halving requires an immediate, severe global shock (e.g., major ecological/resource crisis slashing effective carrying capacity). Without that, it warns of potential acceleration and instability later.
The two approaches are complementary, not contradictory: UN provides granular, data-driven forecasts assuming adaptive trends continue. TZ offers a physics-inspired dynamical systems lens on regime shifts and tipping points.

In summary, the UN offers the consensus baseline of peak then slow decline.

The TZ model complements it by exploring nonlinear risks under catastrophe, highlighting why sustainability matters.

They are not contradictory but serve different purposes: detailed forecasting vs. dynamical systems insight.

If This Lawsuit Succeeds, Global Business Changes Overnight

The case is part of a larger global trend of environmental and climate-related litigation. Nearly 3,000 climate-related cases have been filed worldwide, and courts are increasingly being asked to address questions of corporate responsibility, environmental damage, and cross-border accountability.

From Watts Up With That?

By Gerard Scimeca

How far should U.S. law reach beyond U.S. borders? In June, a federal courtroom in St. Louis will confront that question in a case with implications that extend far beyond one Missouri company or one Peruvian town.

The case is Reid v. Doe Run Resources Corporation, brought by roughly 2,800 Peruvian plaintiffs alleging injuries from emissions tied to the La Oroya metallurgical complex in Peru. The plaintiffs seek to hold liable Doe Run Resources Corporation, a Missouri-based parent company, even though the facility at heart of the lawsuit was owned and operated by subsidiary Doe Run Peru, all operations were in Peru, and the facility was operating for 75 years before Doe Run Peru purchased it in 1997.

At stake is not merely a dispute over pollution claims from a century-old industrial facility. The case could reshape the boundaries of U.S. tort law, weaken confidence in international trade agreements and paralyze U.S. investment in developing nations.

First, the facts. La Oroya was not a pristine operation spoiled by careless new owners. It had operated continuously since 1922 and, when Doe Run’s Peruvian subsidiary acquired the facility in 1997, it inherited an aging industrial site that had spent decades operating with virtually no environmental controls.

According to testimony already in the record, the new owners invested approximately $300 million attempting to modernize and improve conditions at what one expert described under oath as an “awful, rundown, polluting facility.” And, notably, the parent company back in Missouri simply wasn’t the decision maker. Even the plaintiffs’ own environmental expert—after reportedly spending 1,000 hours reviewing the evidence—could not identify a single operational decision made by the Missouri parent company. That matters because the plaintiffs’ jurisdictional theory depends precisely on the idea that the U.S. parent directed operations abroad.

If courts begin allowing American parent corporations to be hauled into domestic court for overseas operations absent evidence of direct control, every multinational enterprise—from manufacturing and energy to pharmaceuticals and technology—will face pressure to defend foreign disputes under an unpredictable patchwork of state tort law.

And it’s not just U.S. companies concerned by the precedent that could be set by this case—Peru itself has objected! The Peruvian government has twice formally protested the litigation to the U.S. State Department, arguing the case infringes on Peru’s sovereignty and conflicts with obligations under the U.S.–Peru Trade Promotion Agreement.

Trade agreements depend on mutual confidence that each nation’s legal system will respect agreed jurisdictional boundaries. If American courts effectively become global tribunals for disputes arising entirely overseas, foreign governments may reasonably conclude that the U.S. no longer honors the limits embedded in its own trade architecture.

There is also a profound investment question. Developing nations depend on foreign direct investment to rehabilitate outdated infrastructure. Investors willing to assume environmental and operational risk are often the only path toward modernization. But investors also study legal exposure. If a company that acquires a deteriorating foreign facility, spends hundreds of millions improving it, and operates through a locally incorporated subsidiary can still face decades of litigation in American courts, rational investors will think twice before taking similar risks.

The U.S. benefits enormously from an open global economy and from the rule of law. Both depend on predictability. If courts blur the distinction between parent corporations and foreign subsidiaries, disregard sovereign objections from allied governments, and create liability untethered from direct operational control, the result will not be greater justice. It will be greater uncertainty. And uncertainty is the enemy of investment, development and international cooperation alike.

Gerard Scimeca is chairman and general counsel for CASE, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy, a free-market oriented consumer organization he co-founded.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

Modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020–2053): The Little Ice Age Has Begun

Zharkova’s double dynamo model reframes the solar cycle as the result of two coupled but slightly detuned magnetic waves from separate layers, whose interference naturally produces both the 11-year cycle and longer grand cycles/minima. It offers an elegant explanation for observed variability and bold predictive power, but remains a minority view due to challenges in validation against long-term records and the inherent complexity of solar magnetism.

Zharkova’s double dynamo model (primarily from her 2015 paper in Scientific Reports and follow-up works) proposes that solar magnetic activity arises from two interacting dynamo processes in different layers of the Sun’s interior, rather than a single dynamo as in many traditional models.

In summary, Zharkova’s double dynamo model reframes the solar cycle as the result of two coupled but slightly detuned magnetic waves from separate layers, whose interference naturally produces both the 11-year cycle and longer grand cycles/minima.

It offers an elegant explanation for observed variability and bold predictive power, but remains a minority view due to challenges in validation against long-term records and the inherent complexity of solar magnetism. Ongoing solar observations (e.g., Cycle 25/26 behavior) continue to test it.

Mainstream assessments from NOAA, NASA, and climate modeling studies conclude that even a full Maunder-level Grand Solar Minimum (GSM) would have only a modest, temporary cooling effect—far too small to trigger a new Little Ice Age or offset most projected anthropogenic warming.

Zharkova’s double dynamo model (primarily from her 2015 paper in Scientific Reports and follow-up works) proposes that solar magnetic activity arises from two interacting dynamo processes in different layers of the Sun’s interior, rather than a single dynamo as in many traditional models.

Traditional solar dynamo models often assume a single deep dynamo in the convection zone driving the ~11-year sunspot cycle (and its 22-year magnetic polarity reversal).

Zharkova’s team applied Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to solar background magnetic field (SBMF) data from full-disk magnetograms (e.g., from the Wilcox Solar Observatory, covering solar cycles 21–23/24). This statistical technique decomposes complex data into principal components (eigenvectors) that capture the most variance.

They identified two dominant principal components (PCs) accounting for a significant portion of the variance (~39% of variance or ~67% standard deviation). These are interpreted as two magnetic waves (poloidal fields) originating from dipole sources in two distinct layers:

One deep layer (near the bottom of the convection zone).
One shallow layer (closer to the surface).

These waves have similar but not identical frequencies (both ~11 years), with a variable phase shift between them. They travel from opposite hemispheres and can be converted into toroidal fields that produce sunspots via processes like the Parker mechanism (electromotive force).

When the two waves are in phase (constructive interference/resonance), their amplitudes add up → high solar activity (grand maxima).

When they are out of phase (destructive interference), amplitudes cancel → low solar activity (grand minima).

The slight frequency difference causes beating effects (modulation over longer periods), producing grand cycles of ~350–400 years superimposed on the standard ~11/22-year cycles.

This interaction is modeled with an α-Ω dynamo incorporating meridional circulation (flow patterns in the convection zone), and it can be simulated to match the observed PCA waves. The model suggests the Sun’s “own oscillations” (eigenvalues) remain stable over long periods, with variations mainly from conditions in the two layers.

The model is data-driven from observations and aims to explain longer-term variability (grand cycles) that single-dynamo models struggle with. It has been extended in later papers to include solar-terrestrial links and more millennia of data.

However, it has faced significant criticism from solar physicists:

Based on relatively short modern datasets (~35–40 years) extrapolated over centuries/millennia.
Fails to accurately reproduce some past solar activity features when tested against independent reconstructions (e.g., from cosmogenic isotopes).
Treats the system as overly regular/predictable (like a simple oscillator), whereas real solar dynamos involve more stochastic (random) processes, turbulence, and complexity.
Mainstream models emphasize deeper, more coupled processes and note that even a grand minimum would have limited climate impact compared to greenhouse gases.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020-2053)
Little Ice Age started

This is a 2026 paper by Valentina Zharkova titled “Modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020-2053): Little Ice Age started”, published in Science of Climate Change, Vol. 6.2, pp. 50-61 (submitted Jan 2026, accepted Feb 2026).

It is an update to her earlier work, reiterating that her double dynamo model predictions are materializing and claiming observational evidence of cooling in early 2026.

Key Claims in the Paper

Double Dynamo Recap: The Sun’s activity is driven by two principal magnetic waves (from PCA of solar background magnetic field data) originating in separate layers (deep and shallow in the convection zone). Their interference produces the ~11-year cycles and longer ~330–380-year grand solar cycles, with grand minima when the waves are out of phase.
Modern GSM1 (2020–2053): The first of two upcoming grand solar minima (the second in ~2375–2410). She states it “has arrived” and will progress as predicted, with reduced solar magnetic field and activity, especially in cycles 25–27.
Solar Irradiance and Temperature Impact: A reduction of ~3 W/m² in solar irradiance (~0.22%) during the GSM, leading to ~1.0°C average terrestrial cooling (stronger in the Northern Hemisphere). This is presented as already observable.
“Little Ice Age Started”: Zharkova cites cold weather, frosts, and snow in January–February 2026 across the Northern Hemisphere (from East Asia through Europe to North America, reaching subtropics), plus some Southern Hemisphere signs. She links this directly to the GSM and declares the associated Little Ice Age has begun. She notes this is happening even as Solar Cycle 25 passed its maximum, with more cooling expected in the declining phase and minima between cycles 25–26 and 26–27.
Broader Implications: Increased need for reliable energy for heating, attention to food security/agriculture, potential volcanic activity in cycle 26 adding to cooling, and weakened interplanetary magnetic field allowing stronger planetary (e.g., Earth) magnetic influences.
Conclusions: The GSM predicted in 2015 is on track; humanity must prepare for the cold period.

The paper is framed as proceedings or an update in a journal (Science of Climate Change) that appears open to this perspective. It builds on her prior publications (2015, 2020, etc.).

Context and Scientific Reception

Zharkova’s model remains a minority view. While it elegantly fits certain patterns via the two-wave interference, mainstream solar physics critiques include:

Reliance on relatively short datasets extrapolated far into the past/future.
Challenges in reproducing some historical solar activity proxies accurately.
Over-simplification of the complex, turbulent, and stochastic nature of solar dynamos.

As of 2026, Solar Cycle 25 was stronger than many early forecasts, and while there is natural variability and regional cold snaps, global temperature records and consensus climate assessments do not support a new Little Ice Age underway. A Maunder-like minimum is generally expected to produce at most ~0.1–0.3°C of global cooling—temporary and insufficient to offset ongoing greenhouse gas warming.

This paper represents Zharkova doubling down on her predictions with recent weather events as purported confirmation. It is worth monitoring solar data (sunspots, irradiance, magnetic fields) and global temperatures through the 2030s for further testing.

Published: Science of Climate Change

Author: Valentina Zharkova

DOI: 10.53234/scc202603/05

Abstract

Much public discourse in global warming centres around the oft-quoted rise in temperature of
approximately 1.1°C in global average temperature in the post-industrial period.

This is considered in some quarters to constitute a “Climate Emergency” demanding “Climate Action”.

In this paper we first dissect the background behind this number and what it means.

Second, we use theEpica-Vostok Ice core dataset, a single proxy dataset for temperature data sampled every centuryfor the last 800,000 years or so and ask the question “Is a 1.1°C temperature rise in a century
unusual in this dataset?”

The answer is surprising.

By considering interglacial onsets and decays as well as intermediating Ice Ages, it turns out that a rise of this amount would have been considered unusual more than200,000 years ago, but this rise is not unusual in the current interglacial which started some 20,000years ago with around 16% of all centuries since the last Ice Age exhibiting a temperature rise ofat least 1.1°C.

None of these could have anthropogenic components as they pre-dated the industrial era.

This result suggests that attempts to partition the current rise into anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic components are questionable given that it is not even unusual.

A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s

It is an update to her earlier work, reiterating that her double dynamo model predictions are materializing and claiming observational evidence of cooling in early 2026.

This is a 2026 paper by Valentina Zharkova titled “Modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020-2053): Little Ice Age started”, published in Science of Climate Change, Vol. 6.2, pp. 50-61 (submitted Jan 2026, accepted Feb 2026).

It is an update to her earlier work, reiterating that her double dynamo model predictions are materializing and claiming observational evidence of cooling in early 2026.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

From NoTrickZone

By Kenneth Richard

Century-scale patterns of solar activity suggest the onset of the next Little Ice Age cooling period is here.

Newly published research utilizing historical solar magnetic field phase analysis documents the impact of solar activity on Earth’s temperature.

Cold “Little Ice Age” periods can be reliably linked to Grand Solar Minima (GSM).

For example, during the Maunder Minimum (late 1600s to early 1700s), solar irradiance is thought to have declined by about 3 W/m², and consequently the Northern Hemisphere cooled by approximately 1°C.

Using pattern analysis, it may be assumed that the onset of the next GSM has arrived, and global cooling will be realized over the next few decades.

“During a GSM a reduction of solar irradiance is expected by about 3 W/m² from the modern level that causes a decrease of the average terrestrial temperature by about 1.0C.”

“In summary, it can be concluded that the modern grand solar minimum (2020-2053) predicted 10 years ago by Zharkova et al, 2015 has arrived and will progress as expected until the mid of century. There is the cold weather with huge frosts and snows recorded in January- February 2026 in the whole Northern hemisphere from the West to the East and from the North to the equator. The little ice age associated with the modern grand solar minimum is here…”

Day: May 31, 2026

The Sun is Getting Skin-Deep: Helioseismology Reveals Solar Cycle Changes Becoming Increasingly Shallow

ABSTRACT

Like this:

Inside Vladimir Putin’s Quest for Eternal Youth

Like this:

New Nonlinear Model Predicts Possible Global Population Halving by 2064 in Major Crisis Scenario

Abstract

Like this:

If This Lawsuit Succeeds, Global Business Changes Overnight

Like this:

Modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020–2053): The Little Ice Age Has Begun

Like this:

A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s

Century-scale patterns of solar activity suggest the onset of the next Little Ice Age cooling period is here.

Like this: