# New particle? Half-life of some isotopes differ depending on Sun **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 11, 2011, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577 "2011-05-11T22:45:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![smileycat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@smileycat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileycat)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2011, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/1 "2011-05-11T22:45:19Z")
This is my first post here. I have some questions. Well, let me explain. First, I found this article about how scientists at Purdue and Stanford used decay data from the Brookhaven lab to make their conclusion. I also found a second article from Stanford U. (not a paper, mind you), featuring Professor Sturrock’s ideas. They (Fischbach from Purdue and Sturrock from Stanford) think the Sun is emitting particles (maybe neutrinos, or **maybe a new particle** ) that may be changing the half-life rate of some radioactive isotopes. They say it occurs on a regular basis which coincides with the Sun’s inner core rotation. The implications could change a lot of things! (Think carbon dating artifacts.) This sounds so against what we were taught in basic physics that I wanted to get a scientist’s opinion on this subject. As hard as it is to believe, I am not a scientist! 😃 (I see this as being part of a sci-fi type set up in a world where traditional physics no longer works.) I am a writer. :o My primary genre is sci-fi. Would any of you know about this new particle from the Sun affecting radioactive isotope half-lives? Here are the links, followed by excerpts for each: [http://news.discovery.com/space/is-the-sun-emitting-a-mystery-particle.html:](http://news.discovery.com/space/is-the-sun-emitting-a-mystery-particle.html:) > [@](#): > > When probing the deepest reaches of the Cosmos or magnifying our understanding of the quantum world, a whole host of mysteries present themselves. This is to be expected when pushing our knowledge of the Universe to the limit. > > But what if a well-known – and apparently constant – characteristic of matter starts behaving mysteriously? > > This is exactly what has been noticed in recent years; the decay rates of radioactive elements are changing. This is especially mysterious as we are talking about elements with “constant” decay rates – these values aren’t supposed to change. School textbooks teach us this from an early age. > > This is the conclusion that researchers from Stanford and Purdue University have arrived at, but the only explanation they have is even weirder than the phenomenon itself: The sun might be emitting a previously unknown particle that is meddling with the decay rates of matter. Or, at the very least, we are seeing some new physics. > **[Stanford Report](https://news.stanford.edu)** > > News, research, and insights from Stanford University. > [@](#): > > 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… > > and > > 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… > > and > > 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. > > 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… > > and > > All of the evidence points toward a conclusion that the sun is “communicating” with radioactive isotopes on Earth, said Fischbach. I also found a list of papers written by Fischbach and the lot of them here: [http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/fischbach/efpubsreverse07.pdf](http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/fischbach/efpubsreverse07.pdf) That’s about all I could find on it. Anyone heard of this? What do you think? Any scientists in the house? ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/2 "2011-05-12T00:13:27Z")
Here’s [the paper](http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283) on arXiv. You can see the correlation in period between the decay and Earth-Sun distance for yourself in the plots. One problem is that the decay rate variations lag the distance plot by a couple months. Not sure how to explain that if it’s truly the Earth-Sun distance that matters. ETA: I actually already had that paper open on my laptop. There’s a completely different experiment looking to detect darks matter that shows a seasonal variation with the Earth’s speed around the galaxy\*. I was looking to see if the above variations correlated with the Earth’s speed as in the dark matter experiment (they didn’t). \*Actually, there are a couple that show variation, and a couple others that don’t. So it’s kind of up in the air right now. ---
**Author:** ![smileycat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@smileycat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileycat)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/3 "2011-05-12T01:43:27Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > Here’s [the paper](http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283) on arXiv. You can see the correlation in period between the decay and Earth-Sun distance for yourself in the plots. One problem is that the decay rate variations lag the distance plot by a couple months. Not sure how to explain that if it’s truly the Earth-Sun distance that matters. > > ETA: I actually already had that paper open on my laptop. There’s a completely different experiment looking to detect darks matter that shows a seasonal variation with the Earth’s speed around the galaxy\*. I was looking to see if the above variations correlated with the Earth’s speed as in the dark matter experiment (they didn’t). > > \*Actually, there are a couple that show variation, and a couple others that don’t. So it’s kind of up in the air right now. Thanks, ZenBeam! And for the link as well. Would the decay variation lag have anything to do with the Sun’s core rotation rate? ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/4 "2011-05-12T06:00:59Z")
Photons take millennia to get from the centre of the sun to the surface, and then 8 minutes to get to the earth. Neutrinos pay almost no attention to matter and so only take the 8 minutes. Accounting for a delay of a couple of months (whether citing a particular region of emittance or particle properties) takes some very special pleading, which I would distrust implicitly. Something else is going on here, and experimental error would be my #1 suspect. They’re not accounting for something in their environment. ---
**Author:** ![smileycat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@smileycat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileycat)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/5 "2011-05-12T10:58:23Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > Photons take millennia to get from the centre of the sun to the surface, and then 8 minutes to get to the earth. Neutrinos pay almost no attention to matter and so only take the 8 minutes. > > Accounting for a delay of a couple of months (whether citing a particular region of emittance or particle properties) takes some very special pleading, which I would distrust implicitly. Something else is going on here, and experimental error would be my #1 suspect. They’re not accounting for something in their environment. Do you think that might be why they suspect a new particle? Or is it simply that the Brookhaven lab data was measured incorrectly? ---
**Author:** ![Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/half_man_half_wit/32/21766_2.png) [@Half\_Man\_Half\_Wit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Half_Man_Half_Wit)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/6 "2011-05-12T14:26:56Z")
If I remember correctly, Jenkins et al. only looked at other people’s data to come to their conclusion – and if you’re not directly involved with an experiment, it’s hard to quantify its systematic errors. It’s entirely possible that some environmental change affected measurement quality – could be something as simple as the AC running during summer introducing a source of noise – which accounts for the apparent effect. [Another investigation](http://donuts.berkeley.edu/papers/EarthSun.pdf) (PDF) into long-term decay rates apparently hasn’t found any effect. > [@ZenBeam](#): > > One problem is that the decay rate variations lag the distance plot by a couple months. Not sure how to explain that if it’s truly the Earth-Sun distance that matters. I’m going from third-hand discussion and (probably bad) memory here, but one possibility that was suggested was that it’s perhaps only beta emitters that are affected, and that the lag is due to beta emitter buildup as decay products from a primarily alpha emitting isotope – so that you only begin to see a variation once significantly many beta emitters are present. That would also account for the Cassini probe, which uses plutonium-238, an alpha emitter, as a fuel source, [not seeing any change in decay rate](http://www.astroengine.com/2008/09/using-cassini-to-test-radioactive-decay-rate-variation/) depending on its distance from the sun. Another advantage to this would be that we already know that beta decay rates sometimes vary depending on the environment (quick googling brought up [this](http://www.springerlink.com/content/g482g72871006420/), but I’m not sure it’s what I was thinking about). > [@](#): > > ETA: I actually already had that paper open on my laptop. There’s a completely different experiment looking to detect darks matter that shows a seasonal variation with the Earth’s speed around the galaxy\*. I was looking to see if the above variations correlated with the Earth’s speed as in the dark matter experiment (they didn’t). Nice, I was thinking along similar lines, thanks for checking. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2011, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/7 "2011-05-12T20:15:27Z")
Talk of this first started up at least a few years ago, and the conclusion then was also that there weren’t enough data, or of high enough quality, to really justify any conclusion. Personally, my guess (though I haven’t really looked into it in any detail) is that something in the detectors is responding to environmental temperature. ---
**Author:** ![JWT\_Kottekoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3ec8ea/32.png) [@JWT\_Kottekoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JWT_Kottekoe)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/8 "2011-05-13T02:08:11Z")
Sturrock is also into UFOs. ---
**Author:** ![Pasta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecccb3/32.png) [@Pasta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pasta)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/9 "2011-05-13T02:57:38Z")
[Previous (if short) thread on the subject.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=492773) ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/10 "2011-05-13T06:16:11Z")
> [@smileycat](#): > > Do you think that might be why they suspect a new particle? Or is it simply that the Brookhaven lab data was measured incorrectly? I think they’ve failed to sufficiently account for some environmental factor, such as seasonal variations in temps, humidity or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![smileycat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@smileycat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileycat)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/11 "2011-05-13T21:48:59Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > I think they’ve failed to sufficiently account for some environmental factor, such as seasonal variations in temps, humidity or whatever. Okay, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2015, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/12 "2015-11-30T15:21:18Z")
According to the following paper, a re-analysis of the radioactive decay data shows a correlation not to the Earth-Sun distance, but the Sun’s rotation period: > **[Comparative Analysis of Brookhaven National Laboratory Nuclear Decay Data and...](https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.08770)** > > An experiment carried out at the Brookhaven National Laboratory from February > 1982 to December 1989 acquired 364 measurements of the beta-decay rates of a > sample of 36Cl and of a sample of 32Si. The experimenters reported finding > small periodic... ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-particle-half-life-of-some-isotopes-differ-depending-on-sun/581577/13 "2015-11-30T16:50:08Z")
As an aside, scientists doing research on gravitational waves just entirely throw out all data at certain frequencies, including 1/year, 1/day, and 60 Hz (or whatever AC frequency is used in their locale). There are just so many potential sources of noise at those frequencies that it’s not worth it to try to track them all down and account for them. And this is coming from scientists who literally do track experimental error from the gravitational fields of tumbleweeds blowing past. I think they might also even throw out 1/week, because so much human activity has that frequency.