Sunspot Number Progression Update.

cycle22cycle23cycle24big

 

This is a big chart of what the solar cycle looks like, with three of the past peaks showing.  We can go back 100 years and in all cases except one, a market bullish phase started on the upswing of a new solar cycle. The lows in the solar cycles coincide very well with lows in the stock markets. 

 

solar-cycle-sunspot-number

 

For a good chart with more technical recordings, then this chart is a better one, as the black dots represent a finishing month. We can clearly see that the solar cycle is far from finished, as it declines more at turtle speed, then at rabbit speed.

The rise in solar activity is faster, as it takes less time up than down. One scientist measured the ratios and it came very close to the Fibonacci sequence. (.382 for the up cycle, and .618 of the time length of the down cycle)

In life, in the markets, and in the universe you cannot get away from the Fibonacci sequence. About 10 years ago I switched my brain over to all Fibonacci even numbers, and use them to calculate years from top to bottoms or even top to top. Just using even numbers does not require  you to sit in front of a computer screen.  For now we still should have 4 years to go when we get close to the major bottom of solar cycle #24.

When we get close I will need to hunt up the site that tracks the turnings, when the new sunspots start to poke through again. The polarity will be switched giving us the clue that the next solar cycle is starting to arrive.  Many scientists will be talking about it early as well, so we should have lots of warning that a turning is due.

 

sunspot_cycles_1926-2003

 

Here we have a simple chart of how the solar cycles affect the fundamentals of the economy and the stock market. If we look back to 1932 we also had a bottom of a solar cycle, followed by a 5 year boom in stocks.  1932 is what I call the start of Cycle degree wave zero, or the SC degree wave two. The majority of wave analysts, have the 1932 bottom, as SC  degree wave 4, which I say is completely wrong.   There are several main reasons why! I don’t think big 4th wave bottoms produce depressions, they sure can produce recessions. The other big reason is that any 5th wave that would follow will never extend as long as it did, and it would not be so well formed.

Besides the book tells us that wave 3’s should always be the longest and first waves are usally the shortest.  From the 1932 bottom, we are still in Cycle degree, but 2021 should give us a Fibonacci 89 year time period, from one low to the next stock market low.

The argument will be around the 1970’s bear market, as the majority of wave analysts counted that time period out, as Cycle degree wave 3 and 4! I sure did and it took me over a decade of counting before I started to clue in that Cycle degree wave 4 was not stuck in the 1970’s. 1975 and 1976 was also another major stock market bottom, matching the bottom in another solar cycle as well.

The 70’s time period looks like a huge bear market, but in fact it is easy to fit into a 1-2, 1-2, 1-2 wave count base, producing another 5 waves up in a mega bull market. I believe the markets will never fall back to the 70’s price level in any major higher degree, but I’m sure they will keep making that forecast for the next hundreds of years.

 

djia-2016-3

 

My work is specifically dedicated to finding, confirming and keeping all Cycle degree positions first. It is mathematically impossible to move into any SC degree, before all 5 Cycle degree positions are found. Not just found, but also confirmed. I want all the Cycle degree locations to last forever, and yes, they can be spread 30 years apart, like the USD and even the Nikkei. Since 2000 we now have a total of 3 major peaks in the DJIA. Not getting these 3 peaks sorted out, will throw every wave count that will ever follow, into question.

Any wave analysts that forgets the past will be doomed to repeat it, and at a bare minimum, we have to get the last 100 years figured out right.

Missing a major bull market with wave analysis should be unacceptable, and those that had a Primary degree wave 1 bottom in 2009, have to trash their entire wave counts, and go back to 1929 and count again.  Cosmetic wave counting will not work, as it is impossible to trade on cosmetically created wave counts.