The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements

Stanford University ^ | August 23, 2010 | DAN STOBER

[grey_whiskers]

*PING* to those of you not already on this thread.

For the rest of you, check out this blast from the past.

Cheers!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Kevmo]

Glad you posted this. I was going to post it myself.

Something that affects radioactive decay rates and is faster than light. Communication with spacecraft will be the obvious application here.

[decimon]

...faster than light. That's not been claimed.

[aruanan]

But there's one rather large question left unanswered. No one knows how neutrinos could interact with radioactive materials to change their rate of decay.

"It doesn't make sense according to conventional ideas," Fischbach said. Jenkins whimsically added, "What we're suggesting is that something that doesn't really interact with anything is changing something that can't be changed."

"It's an effect that no one yet understands," agreed Sturrock. "Theorists are starting to say, 'What's going on?' But that's what the evidence points to. It's a challenge for the physicists and a challenge for the solar people too."

If the mystery particle is not a neutrino, "It would have to be something we don't know about, an unknown particle that is also emitted by the sun and has this effect, and that would be even more remarkable," Sturrock said.

It would also be interesting to know if the effects vary between isotopes, how much the effect varies between periods of solar quiescence and periods of intense solar activity, the degree to which solar activity has varied over time, and whether this accounts for differences in radiological ages obtained using the isotope ratios of different radioactive elements. Of course, you'd have to have a known, rather than assumed, starting ratio to measure over time.

[samtheman]

Shades of "The Endochronic Properties of Resublimated Thiotimoline." (See Asimov).

Thanks for posting that. I've read a lot of Asimov in my life but missed this one. (He wrote a lot.)

Here's a summary from everything2.com:

This was a short story by Isaac Asimov, written in 1948. It is not a short story at all, as it takes the form of a chemistry paper. It is in fact a spoof, based on the idea that the more hydrophilic (i.e., water-loving) a chemical is, the faster it will dissolve in water. So, chemicals with increasing hydrophilism would decrease the time it would take to dissolve. Asimov's spoof pretends that a chemical called thiotimoline exists, and the time which it takes to dissolve is so low that the chemical actually dissolves before it touches the water. This was published in Astounding Stories, a magazine which specialised in short sci-fi stories. However, many people believed that the paper was real, and fans wrote in to the magazine asking for further information on the chemical, and libraries were "stormed" by people trying to locate the papers which Asimov had made joke references to. Although the work itself was essentially fiction, the format was of non-fiction.

..."Although the work itself was essentially fiction, the format was of non-fiction."...

And that is Shades of Global Warming!

[samtheman]

It's going to be interesting to see what kind of explanation physicists come up with for this. In one fell swoop it seems to open a whole new way to study the neutrino, the weak force itself, and the center of the Sun! And if it's not the neutrino, it reveals the existence of a new particle (or better yet, a new force in nature) and gives physicists a way to study it!

That's the situation we now find ourselves in.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Would this raise questions on the use of carbon dating?"

Not particularly. The total cumulative time that solar flares are causing the effect is very small compared to the time frames that carbon dating addresses. The solar wind has a much larger effect, which is why C-14 dates have to be corrected for that by cross-comparison to dendrochronology.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Would this raise questions on the use of carbon dating?"

On thinking about it for a minute or three, I would say that because of carbon dating's cross-calibration with dendrochronology it is the ONLY "radioactive decay" clock that is NOT affected. The cross-calibration corrects for the effect.

Other atomic clocks (potassium-argon, uranium-lead, etc.) will be in error, but my original comment about relative times of effect vs decay time measured, stands.

[Bernard Marx]

Global Warming, like the thiotimoline piece, has fooled a lot of gullible people. But I was thinking more along the lines of this specific comment about the solar flares:

"Jere Jenkins, while measuring the decay rate of manganese-54, a short-lived isotope used in medical diagnostics, noticed that the rate dropped slightly during the flare, a decrease that started about a day and a half before the flare."

[LibWhacker]

HI, Sam... Not sure if you’re agreeing with me or not. All I’m saying is this will give us a new way to study these things, if the effect is confirmed.

[samtheman]

I absolutely was agreeing with you. Totally and completely. This alters the situation regarding the study of physics in a basic and fundamental way.

We find ourselves in a new situation regarding the study of atomic nuclei and solar processes.

[LibWhacker]

Okay, whew! I was worried... I’m so darned enthusiastic about this! It’s so strange and potentially so important. The implications are hard to comprehend. I hope it’s confirmed. WOW! is about all I can say about it. This may be the most important find in physics since dark matter and dark energy.

[samtheman]

This may be the most important find in physics since dark matter and dark energy.

Except neither of those have actually been "found" yet, merely inferred. I know, the evidence is there, and it is strong, but the actual "found" is still lacking.

[LibWhacker]

You’re right. There I go getting overly enthusiastic again. Well, I’m going to be waiting with bated breath for the next shoe to drop on this latest discovery, that’s for sure!

[samtheman]

I’m not saying there’s no such thing as dark matter or dark energy and I’m not saying that their emergence into the theoretical picture isn’t extremely important. It is. But they both still have a lot of questions.

But getting back to this story... yes. Astounding.

I forwarded it to a physicist friend of mine and I’ll post here what he says about it.

[LibWhacker]

I’ll post here what he says about it.

Yes, please do. Ping me if he can't get around to replying to you right away, okay? Too bad Freeper "Physicist" doesn't hang with us anymore. He always had interesting things to say about the latest news in physics.

[samtheman]

Here's his reply. (Actually, I was wrong to say he's a physicist. He's an engineer working in display technology development but he has a strong interest in physics.)

Fascinating! Physics is SO in need of shake-up/wake up - maybe this data will help. A good part of the profession are just of a bunch of medieval monks constantly trying to rationalize away all the contradictory/anomalous evidence that keeps popping up all over. Tired of the VERY bad habit of positing "unobservables" to save their bad theories ("dark matter," "dark energy," etc.) - tired of "unprovable" but "mathematically elegant" "theories" like "string theory", never induced from any experiment!

Yay for the pesky experimentalists! Yay for the (routinely sub-caste of) applied physicists! Yay for plasma physicists!

I personally don't agree with him on dark energy/matter, though I do on string theory.

[LibWhacker]

Thanks. Yes, your friend voices what’s become a rather common complaint about modern physics. Can’t say I disagree with it, but I still love all the theories coming out of the theorists. At least it means they’re not out of ideas. Somebody is going to hit on the right one pretty soon I think. Hope I’m around to see it. Cheers!

[samtheman]

Me too.