No evidence for planetary influence on solar activity
Robert H. Cameron, Manfred Sch\"ussler

TL;DR
This study critically evaluates claims of planetary influence on solar activity by statistically analyzing periodicities and finds no significant evidence supporting such influence.
Contribution
It provides a rigorous statistical reassessment of previous claims, demonstrating that the observed periodicities are likely due to chance rather than planetary effects.
Findings
No statistically significant correlation between planetary torques and solar activity records.
Previous claims of planetary influence are not supported after correcting for noise and analysis errors.
The probability of chance coincidence is high, indicating no causal link.
Abstract
Recently, Abreu et al. (2012, A&A, 548, A88) proposed a long-term modulation of solar activity through tidal effects exerted by the planets. This claim is based upon a comparison of (pseudo-)periodicities derived from records of cosmogenic isotopes with those arising from planetary torques on an ellipsoidally deformed Sun. We examined the statistical significance of the reported similarity of the periods. The tests carried out by Abreu et al. were repeated with artificial records of solar activity in the form of white or red noise. The tests were corrected for errors in the noise definition as well as in the apodisation and filtering of the random series. The corrected tests provide probabilities for chance coincidence that are higher than those claimed by Abreu et al. by about 3 and 8 orders of magnitude for white and red noise, respectively. For an unbiased choice of the width of the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
