3 ms·
Do nuclear decay rates depend on our distance from the sun?
- randallsquared 18y agoI really, really hope this is true. :) Nuclear-weapon suppression field, anyone?
- Herring 18y agoThe change in decay rate was on the order of .1%
- randallsquared 18y agoStill, the idea that low energy EM can affect nuclear decay even that strongly suggests new physics that might lead to more EM-nuclear coupled devices. I'm sure it's far too early for reasonable speculation, but I'm excited. :)
- steelhive 18y agoYou are to be commended to think like that. But past evidence suggests we'd more likely use the knowledge to increase nuclear decay and make improved weapons.
- randallsquared 18y agoGiven that the nuclear batteries for various outer-system probes still work properly, I think it's far less likely that an increase is possible. Standard decay rates seem likely to be close to the maximum possible, since only slowing was reported. I'm not sure if anyone's used nuclear-powered spacecraft closer to the sun; it doesn't seem likely, since solar power is plentiful there.
- DabAsteroid 18y agoI'm not sure if anyone's used nuclear-powered spacecraft closer to the sun http://www.google.com/search?q=rtg+sun+nasa+Ulysses http://www.google.com/search?q=rtg+sun+nasa+Ulysses Ulysses was in the news in 1996-1997 because NASA's Cassini-RTG decision was being criticized. The argument was that NASA's can't-use-solar-at-the-distance-of-Saturn argument didn't hold water in light of the fact that NASA even chose to put an RTG on a Sun explorer. it doesn't seem likely, since solar power is plentiful there. That was the crux of the NASA-can't-be-trusted argument.
- albertcardona 18y agoUnexplained periodic fluctuations in the decay rates of Si-32 and Ra-226 have been reported by groups at Brookhaven National Laboratory (Si-32), and at the Physikalisch-Technische-Bundesandstalt in Germany (Ra-226). We show from an analysis of the raw data in these experiments that the observed fluctuations are strongly correlated in time, not only with each other, but also with the distance between the Earth and the Sun. Some implications of these results are also discussed, including the suggestion that discrepancies in published half-life determinations for these and other nuclides may be attributable in part to differences in solar activity during the course of the various experiments, or to seasonal variations in fundamental constants. From the original paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283 http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283 What the above means: that the fabric of reality changes in relation to the distance from a large mass or a large source of neutrins.
- pmorici 18y agoDoes this mean that carbon dating isn't as accurate as they thought if this is true?
- Eliezer 18y agoI hope this is a joke, based on the roughly 3000 times this question was asked and answered "No!" on Slashdot. It's also pretty unlikely to be true, I understand the correlation involved was weak, imperfect and not precisely timed.
- pmorici 18y agoNo, I don't regularly read slashdot and no one asked the question here yet so... I don't find it surprising though that that is the first question that would pop into most peoples heads as dating is the most popularly know use of decay measurements.
- rglovejoy 18y agoUnlikely. The distance between the Earth and the Sun varies throughout the year, but it all evens out. When you are trying to figure out the age of a sample that may be thousands of years old, these variations are just noise and nothing significant. What would be interesting is how the decay rate on the nuclear generators aboard Pioneers 10 & 11 and Voyagers 1 & 2 have varied as they traveled away from the Sun over the past 30-40 years. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...
- hugh 18y agoProbably not. But hey, I'd support strapping a geiger counter and a hunk of Si-32 onto a rocket and firing it into the sun, just to be sure. (Or away from the sun, but into the sun is quicker and more fun.)
- randallsquared 18y agoMore likely to produce interesting results in a timely fashion, eh? :)
- hugh 18y agoRocket + radioactive silicon + crashing into the sun = all possible flavours of awesome. I can't think of any better way to spend $200 million.