Solar flares are teleconnected to earthly radioactive decay

From Stanford University News a really wild must read science discovery.

h/t to Leif Svalgaard and WUWT reader “carbon-based-life-form”.

The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements

When researchers found an unusual linkage between solar flares and the inner life of radioactive elements on Earth, it touched off a scientific detective investigation that could end up protecting the lives of space-walking astronauts and maybe rewriting some of the assumptions of physics.

BY DAN STOBER

It’s a mystery that presented itself unexpectedly: The radioactive decay of some elements sitting quietly in laboratories on Earth seemed to be influenced by activities inside the sun, 93 million miles away.

Is this possible?

Researchers from Stanford and Purdue University believe it is. But their explanation of how it happens opens the door to yet another mystery.

There is even an outside chance that this unexpected effect is brought about by a previously unknown particle emitted by the sun. “That would be truly remarkable,” said Peter Sturrock, Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics and an expert on the inner workings of the sun.

The story begins, in a sense, in classrooms around the world, where students are taught that the rate of decay of a specific radioactive material is a constant. This concept is relied upon, for example, when anthropologists use carbon-14 to date ancient artifacts and

when doctors determine the proper dose of radioactivity to treat a cancer patient.

Random numbers

But that assumption was challenged in an unexpected way by a group of researchers from Purdue University who at the time were more interested in random numbers than nuclear decay. (Scientists use long strings of random numbers for a variety of calculations, but they are difficult to produce, since the process used to produce the numbers has an influence on the outcome.)

Ephraim Fischbach, a physics professor at Purdue, was looking into the rate of radioactive decay of several isotopes as a possible source of random numbers generated without any human input. (A lump of radioactive cesium-137, for example, may decay at a steady rate overall, but individual atoms within the lump will decay in an unpredictable, random pattern. Thus the timing of the random ticks of a Geiger counter placed near the cesium might be used to generate random numbers.)

As the researchers pored through published data on specific isotopes, they found disagreement in the measured decay rates – odd for supposed physical constants.

Checking data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal Physical and Technical Institute in Germany, they came across something even more surprising: long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in summer.

Peter Sturrock
Peter Sturrock, professor emeritus of applied physics - photo L.A. Cicero

Was this fluctuation real, or was it merely a glitch in the equipment used to measure the decay, induced by the change of seasons, with the accompanying changes in temperature and humidity?

“Everyone thought it must be due to experimental mistakes, because we’re all brought up to believe that decay rates are constant,” Sturrock said.

The sun speaks

On Dec 13, 2006, the sun itself provided a crucial clue, when a solar flare sent a stream of particles and radiation toward Earth. Purdue nuclear engineer 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.

If this apparent relationship between flares and decay rates proves true, it could lead to a method of predicting solar flares prior to their occurrence, which could help prevent damage to satellites and electric grids, as well as save the lives of astronauts in space.

The decay-rate aberrations that Jenkins noticed occurred during the middle of the night in Indiana – meaning that something produced by the sun had traveled all the way through the Earth to reach Jenkins’ detectors. What could the flare send forth that could have such an effect?

Jenkins and Fischbach guessed that the culprits in this bit of decay-rate mischief were probably solar neutrinos, the almost weightless particles famous for flying at almost the speed of light through the physical world – humans, rocks, oceans or planets – with virtually no interaction with anything.

Then, in a series of papers published in Astroparticle Physics, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research and Space Science Reviews, Jenkins, Fischbach and their colleagues showed that the observed variations in decay rates were highly unlikely to have come from environmental influences on the detection systems.

Reason for suspicion

Their findings strengthened the argument that the strange swings in decay rates were caused by neutrinos from the sun. The swings seemed to be in synch with the Earth’s elliptical orbit, with the decay rates oscillating as the Earth came closer to the sun (where it would be exposed to more neutrinos) and then moving away.

So there was good reason to suspect the sun, but could it be proved?

Enter Peter Sturrock, Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics and an expert on the inner workings of the sun. While on a visit to the National Solar Observatory in Arizona, Sturrock was handed copies of the scientific journal articles written by the Purdue researchers.

Sturrock knew from long experience that the intensity of the barrage of neutrinos the sun continuously sends racing toward Earth varies on a regular basis as the sun itself revolves and shows a different face, like a slower version of the revolving light on a police car. His advice to Purdue: Look for evidence that the changes in radioactive decay on Earth vary with the rotation of the sun. “That’s what I suggested. And that’s what we have done.”

A surprise

Going back to take another look at the decay data from the Brookhaven lab, the researchers found a recurring pattern of 33 days. It was a bit of a surprise, given that most solar observations show a pattern of about 28 days – the rotation rate of the surface of the sun.

The explanation? The core of the sun – where nuclear reactions produce neutrinos – apparently spins more slowly than the surface we see. “It may seem counter-intuitive, but it looks as if the core rotates more slowly than the rest of the sun,” Sturrock said.

All of the evidence points toward a conclusion that the sun is “communicating” with radioactive isotopes on Earth, said Fischbach.

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.

Chantal Jolagh, a science-writing intern at the Stanford News Service, contributed to this story.

Share

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

320 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
KR
August 23, 2010 8:50 pm

Thank you for a lovely post. I haven’t had this good a laugh in some time.

August 23, 2010 8:51 pm

“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.”

We already know the plot line to this one, just watch the film 2012.

JP Miller
August 23, 2010 8:53 pm

Ah, yes, Horatio. And who knows what else the sun might be “communicating” to the earth and its various physical systems….

ZZZ
August 23, 2010 9:15 pm

You want my guess about what’s going on? (No, came back the answer loud and clear).
The magnetic fields generated by the sun are affecting just a little bit the electric power generated by the local utility which then affects the performance of their instruments. The yearly change they have measured from season to season does not come from the change in the distance from the earth to the sun but from the change in tilt of the earth’s axis with respect to the suns axis, and 33 day change is, as hypothesized, connected to the rate of solar rotation.

August 23, 2010 9:16 pm

Okay, maybe I’m naive, but I’m not seeing the reason for dismissing this. Nobody had a stake in the outcome. Nobody was even looking for this outcome. And if true, it could be a huge breakthrough on a number of levels.
As I see it, there are two aspects to this. The first is that the steady decay of radioactive elements may not be as steady as we thought. This, of course, must be determined with with absolute certainty before looking for a cause, although it sounds like they’ve done their research on this. If it’s true, then the second aspect is whether or not the sun is the cause.
Allowing that they have adequately shown the rate of decay really does change, what concerns me about the conjecture that the sun plays a role in this change is this:

Going back to take another look at the decay data from the Brookhaven lab, the researchers found a recurring pattern of 33 days. It was a bit of a surprise, given that most solar observations show a pattern of about 28 days – the rotation rate of the surface of the sun.
The explanation? The core of the sun – where nuclear reactions produce neutrinos – apparently spins more slowly than the surface we see. “It may seem counter-intuitive, but it looks as if the core rotates more slowly than the rest of the sun,” Sturrock said.

Now the decay rate fluctuations don’t correspond to what we know of the sun’s spin. To then turn around and use the decay rate fluctuation to conclude that the core of the sun spins at a different rate is — well, it’s a bit disturbing. A little like trying to look for “lost heat” when the thermometers (and tree rings) are showing a decline in temperature.
I don’t know if the sun will eventually prove to be the culprit, but I’m quite excited by the apparent variance of decay rates. If true.

Barry L
August 23, 2010 9:19 pm

WOW….. This seems to be in line with Mr LaViolette:
Prediction No. 11 (1983): Anomalously young radiocarbon dates are frequently found in fossil remains of Pleistocene megafauna that became extinct at the end of the last ice age. In chapter 10 of his dissertation, LaViolette proposed that a solar cosmic ray conflagration caused the demise of these mammals and their subsequent burial by the action of glacier meltwater waves. He suggested that the neutron shower produced by the intense solar cosmic ray storm (coronal mass ejection) that engulfed the Earth would have radiogenically changed nitrogen atoms in animal collagen into carbon-14 atoms. He proposed that this in situ radiocarbon generation could have made the radiocarbon dates on exposed organic matter anomalously young.
http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict.html

August 23, 2010 9:20 pm

And the term “communicating” is used quite often in hard-core physics, and those using it are under no delusion that it refers to communications as the term is more commonly used. It is, for example, used in the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox, in which particles which were once in contact appear to “communicate” with each other instantaneously when the spin of one particle is measured.
Now when environmental activists talk about Gaia “communicating,” that’s a different matter.

August 23, 2010 9:23 pm

KR says:
August 23, 2010 at 8:50 pm
“Thank you for a lovely post. I haven’t had this good a laugh in some time.”
KR is obviously a deeply profound thinker. Pro AGW perhaps?

Richard Henry Lee
August 23, 2010 9:32 pm

Neutrinos are supposed to interact weakly so it is difficult to imagine that they are the culprit. Maybe the solar activity which releases flares is also causing solarquakes which release gravitons (which really interact weakly).
Where is Einstein now that we need him!

Rob M
August 23, 2010 9:33 pm

When this gets mentioned in the mass media,I’m certain the report will end with the comment
“whatever this phenomenon is,many scientists say it will get worse with climate change”
They said something similar after a T.V. news item about how the Jetstream had brought the heat-wave to Western Russia.
I wonder if it’s true what I once heard,that when Jupiter and the Sun form a right-angle with the Earth,long-wave radio reception is affected.

CRS, Dr.P.H.
August 23, 2010 9:38 pm

For anyone interested in this subject, please explore the website for the Fermilab National Accelerator in Batavia, Illinois:
http://www.fnal.gov/
There are some rather remarkable experiments & observations of neutrinos, muons and other particles being made all the time. The gaps in our knowledge are huge , believe me!
BTW, doesn’t this mess up the dating of Briffa’s proxies?

August 23, 2010 9:44 pm

ZZZ August 23, 2010 at 9:15 pm
You want my guess about what’s going on? (No, came back the answer loud and clear).
The magnetic fields generated by the sun are affecting just a little bit the electric power generated by the local utility which then affects the performance of their instruments.

I was going to go with a little more direct effect, i.e., CRs/rays/particles etc directly affecting sensors, readings of sensors, slightly shifting the ‘calibration’ if you will … until that aspect is ironed out, all else would be in vain …
.

david
August 23, 2010 9:49 pm

Yup, it won’t take long before the power hungry warmist and righteous skeptics turn this one into a fist fight. Warmist will claim that this link is negligable. The skeptics will point to another link between earth and sun. In the end I can’t help but believe that science will be trashed.

Konrad
August 23, 2010 9:49 pm

I see direct or indirect solar influence on the detection instruments to be more plausible than neutrino tele-connection with the radioactive material. The gas (Geiger counter ) or liquid ( scintillation counter) would likely be more susceptible to influence by variation in solar or cosmic radiation than the dense radioactive material itself. When ruling out environmental influences on detection equipment, solar and cosmic radiation would need to be ruled out as well. This may require more funding and a very deep mine shaft.

Mick
August 23, 2010 9:50 pm

How about the Voyager/Pioneer probes anomalous trajectory? Is there a connection?

rbateman
August 23, 2010 9:50 pm

If this proves true, does it mean we have a dynamo action going on?
And this 33 day internal spin, does it ever vary (speed up/slow down) or does that province lie with the more surface parts of the sun?
If you had a speedup of the outer layer with the inner core that is involved with flux generation/concentration (somehow), that would change the game. It could be enough to snap or scatter magnetic lines, leading to a disrupted/blown solar cycle.
Right now that SC24 is doing it’s thing again, whatever it is that it’s doing. Mostly misbehaving.
Now, what do you suppose would be the reaction at neutron detectors when these pre-flare episodes are going on?
This also has detrimental implications for C-14.

ian middleton
August 23, 2010 9:51 pm

And I was just thinking the other day, ” wouldn’t it be great if someone could invent a solar cell that worked in the dark”. It may be possible after all. Just find out what these little suckers are and then devise a way to put them work.

tesla_x
August 23, 2010 9:51 pm

Hmmmm…
thinking quantum entanglement may play a role here…
…also thinking terahertz frequencies hitting isotopes can accelerate/change the rate of decay -nuclear decay batteries come to mind-
Are these 2 effects involved?
Are, for example, the isotopes here exposed directly and locally or are one of an entangled pair in the sun being exposed to such teraherz frequencies…and the other here experiencing the same effect remotely?
Is it not delightful to see the ‘best theories’ man has to offer trashed almost daily by nature?

August 23, 2010 9:53 pm

What I would like to know is what type of clock the researchers use to measure the decay rates. If the clock depends on radioactive decay, the clock itself would be affected by the solar flares and, if so, they should not notice any discrepancy.

Fremma
August 23, 2010 9:54 pm

This is indeed the most profound and intriguing report I’ve seen for a very long time. Radioactive decay not constant? Who would have picked that? I imagine that, even now, teams of scientists are lining up to test this result.
I suspect it will turn out to be experimental mistakes or instrument error after all but, if so, please don’t report that too soon – let us have some time to consider the possibilities and speculations first.

August 23, 2010 9:55 pm

Absolutely fascinating. Thanks for posting this. This kind of thing is exactly why many of us got into science in the first place.

rbateman
August 23, 2010 9:56 pm

CRS, Dr.P.H. says:
August 23, 2010 at 9:38 pm
BTW, doesn’t this mess up the dating of Briffa’s proxies?

If if doesn’t mess it up physically, it will surely make many do double and triple-takes on the theory level.
I can see the lines developing at the Antacid and Aspirin displays as we speak.

August 23, 2010 9:58 pm

david says:
August 23, 2010 at 9:49 pm
Yup, it won’t take long before the power hungry warmist and righteous skeptics turn this one into a fist fight. Warmist will claim that this link is negligable. The skeptics will point to another link between earth and sun. In the end I can’t help but believe that science will be trashed.

Well, judging by the sceptics here, what they’re actually saying is, “Let’s find out more.”
I don’t believe that will trash science.

Graeme W
August 23, 2010 10:00 pm

A couple of things struck me. One was that 33 day cycle. They tried to explain it by saying that the core of the sun may rotate at a different speed to the outer layers (Leif, are you able to comment on that part of the report?).
The other was the ‘detection’ of the flare a day and a half before it was formally noticed.
The combination of these two things implies that whatever triggers a flare occurs at least a day and a half before the flare takes place (if the particles causing the decay rate change are neutrinos) OR that whatever is triggering the change in decay rates escapes the Sun a day and a half before the flare takes place (if the particles causing the decay rate change are not neutrinos).
It is in this area that I think we’ll get our clues on what is going on. If it is neutrinos, then that implies that what triggers the flares takes a day and a half to leave the core and reach the area of the Sun where the flare takes place. If that doesn’t seem reasonable, then that implies that it’s not neutrinos.

1 2 3 13
Verified by MonsterInsights