# Cecil goofed on his math

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003>\
**Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\
**Created:** [August 28, 2009, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003 "2009-08-28T05:52:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ponderoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ponderoid/32/19221_2.png) [@Ponderoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ponderoid)\
**Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003/1 "2009-08-28T05:52:57Z")

</div>

In Cecil’s article, “[When’s the best time to see the aurora borealis?](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/151/whens-the-best-time-to-see-the-aurora-borealis)”, Cecil states:

> [@](#):
>
> You can expect more auroral activity as the sun reaches the peak of its 11-year sunspot cycle. Unfortunately, that won’t happen again until after the millennium.

But the column was written December 6, 1974. That left enough time for 2 complete 11-year cycles before 2001, no matter where the sun happened to be when the article was written.

Here’s the chart showing when the maximums actually happened: [File:Solar-cycle-data.png - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar-cycle-data.png) The sun was already getting pretty close to a 3rd maximum in 2000.

\*\*\* Ponder

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\
**Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003/2 "2009-08-28T13:13:32Z")

</div>

Don’t forget that columns are often updated for release in books and stuff. It would take somebody of really low intelligence not to be able to add 22 to the current year.

Still, even with this being updated in 199_x_, the fact that the maximum was going to be in 2000 does suggest that Cecil goofed by forgetting that the millennium would start in 2001. But that is not a math error.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\
**Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003/3 "2009-08-28T13:39:04Z")

</div>

The online column must have been updated somewhere along the way but not very recently. In my dead-tree copy of the book (printed in 1989) the passage reads “Unfortunately, that won’t happen again until 1990 or so.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\
**Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cecil-goofed-on-his-math/508003/4 "2009-08-28T16:21:40Z")

</div>

Last I heard, we are missing almost all the sunspots for the current cycle. (Minimum was 2007 or so?) Last time that happened, in the 1600’s, the weather took a turn for the worse for a few centuries. Anyone notice the last 2 summers have been pretty miserable unless you live on the west coast?