Fischbach

Fischbach, J enkins, and Sturrock et al.
;
Rencontres de Moriond; La Thuile, Italy 2011
Evidence of Solar Influences on
Nuclear Decay Rates
Jere Jenkins
Ephraim Fischbach
Peter Sturrock
Ed Merritt
J osh Mattes
TasneemMohsinally
Dan Mundy
J ohn Newport
Ben Revis
J ohn Buncher
Tom Gruenwald
J ordan Heim
Dan J avorsek
Dennis Krause
Anthony Lasenby
Andrew Longman
Fischbach, J enkins, and Sturrock et al.;
Publications to date
Jenkins, J.H. and E. Fischbach, Perturbation of nuclear decay rates during the solar flare of 2006
December 13. Astroparticle Physics, 2009. 31(6): p. 407-411.
[doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2009.04.005]
Jenkins, J.H., et al., Evidence of Correlations Between Nuclear Decay Rates and Earth-Sun Distance.
Astroparticle Physics, 2009. 32(1): p. 42-46. [doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2009.05.004]
Fischbach, E., et al., Time-Dependent Nuclear Decay Parameters: New Evidence for New Forces? Space
Science Reviews, 2009. 145(3): p. 285-335. [doi: 10.1007/s11214-009-9518-5]
J enkins, J .H., D.W. Mundy, and E. Fischbach, Analysis of environmental influences in nuclear half-life
measurements exhibiting time-dependent decay rates. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics
Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, 2010. 620(2-3): p.
332-342. [doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.03.129]
Sturrock, P.A., et al., Power spectrum analysis of BNL decay rate data. Astroparticle Physics, 2010. 34(2):
p. 121-127. [doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2010.06.004]
Lindstrom, R. M., et al., Study of the dependence of 198Au half-life on source geometry, Nucl. Instr. and
Meth. A, 622 (2010) 93. [doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.06.270]
J avorsek II, D., et al., Power spectrum analyses of nuclear decay rates. Astroparticle Physics, 2010. 34(3):
p. 173-178. [doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2010.06.011]
Fischbach, E., et al., Evidence for Solar Influences on Nuclear Decay Rates. Proceedings of the Fifth
Meeting on CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, editor V.A. Kostelecky, World Scientific, Singapore, In Press.
2010.
Background
116m
In Decay
y =-0.000203x +6.044443
R
2
=0.980358
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Time (s)
C
o
u
n
t
s
/
1
0
s
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
l
n
(
c
o
u
n
t
s
/
1
0
s
)
Counts ln(counts) Linear (ln(counts))
116m
In Decay
y =421.762694e
-0.000203x
R
2
=0.980358
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Time (s)
C
o
u
n
t
s
/
1
0
s
Counts Expon. (Counts)
12
56min T
Motivation
A New Test of Randomness
Decay Rate Fluctuations
Brookhaven National
Laboratory
Measurement of
32
Si Half-life
David Alburger
Garman Harbottle
Eleanor Norton
D.E. Alburger, G. Harbottle, E.F. Norton, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 78 (1986) 168.
Physikalisch-Technische
Bundesanstalt (PTB)
Europium Half-lives and Long
Term Detector Stability
Helmut Siegert
Heinrich Schrader
Ulrich Schoetzig
H. Siegert, H. Schrader, U. Schoetzig, Applied Radiation and Isotopes 49 (1998) 1397.
H. Siegert, H. Schrader, U. Schoetzig, Applied Radiation and Isotopes 49 (1998) 1397.
Purdue Experiments
T
1/2
=1953d
T
1/2
=313.5d
(7.51 1.07) x 10
5
Events missing
40 hours precursor
5 Dec 2006: X-9 class flare
13 Dec 2006: X3/4B Flare
16.22
16.23
16.24
16.25
16.26
16.27
16.28
16.29
16.3
11/28 12/2 12/6 12/10 12/14 12/18 12/22 12/26 12/30 1/3
l
n
(
C
R
)
Date (2008)
Logarithmic Decay of
54
Mn for December 2008
ln(gross) Linear (ln(gross))
16.245
16.25
16.255
16.26
16.265
16.27
16.275
16.28
12/9 12/10 12/11 12/12 12/13 12/14 12/15 12/16 12/17 12/18 12/19 12/20 12/21 12/22 12/23
l
n
(
C
R
)
Date (2008)
54
ln(gross) Linear (ln(gross))
SOLAR ACTIVITY: Hours ago, something
on the far side of the sun exploded and
hurled a massive cloud of debris (a CME)
over the eastern limb. Using a coronagraph
to block the sun's glare, the Solar and
Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO)
photographed the cloud expanding into
space:
NASA's Stereo-B spacecraft is stationed over the
sun's eastern limb, but it was not taking pictures at
the probable time of the eruption, so details of the
blast are unknown. The CME could herald an
active region (e.g., a sunspot or perhaps an
unstable magnetic filament) turning to face Earth
in the days ahead.
y = -0.0022514x + 105.8637406
R = 0.9977750
y = -0.0008937x + 51.8287553
R = 0.5886092
16.245
16.25
16.255
16.26
16.265
16.27
16.275
16.28
12/9 12/10 12/11 12/12 12/13 12/14 12/15 12/16 12/17 12/18 12/19 12/20 12/21 12/22 12/23
l
n
(
C
R
)
Date (2008)
54
ln(gross) 12/14-12/16 Linear (ln(gross))
Linear (12/14-12/16) Linear (12/14-12/16)
Non Earth-directed large CME
recorded by SOHO at 0942 16 Dec 08 UT
T
1/2
=776d
T
1/2
=307d
Data from Yoo, et al., Phys Rev D 68, 092002 (2003)
Solar Neutrinos?
Super-K Data
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
1.2
10/28/95 3/11/97 7/24/98 12/6/99 4/19/01 9/1/02
Date
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

N
u
-
f
l
u
x
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1
/
R
2
,

a
.
u
.
-
2
7 Pt Avgd Normalized Phi-nu 1/R^2
Correlation =0.38, 181 points, prob=3x10
-7
Eccentricity of Earths Orbit
Back to BNL and PTB
Pearson Correlation Coefficient r=0.52, N=239, Prob=4.17x10
-18
Data from: Alburger, et al., Earth and Planet. Sci. Lett., 78, (1986) 168-176
Normalized BNL With Earth-Sun Distance
0.997
0.998
0.999
1.000
1.001
1.002
1.003
0
8
/
8
1
0
2
/
8
2
0
9
/
8
2
0
3
/
8
3
1
0
/
8
3
0
4
/
8
4
1
1
/
8
4
0
6
/
8
5
1
2
/
8
5
0
7
/
8
6
Date
B
N
L

U
(
t
)
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1
/
R
2

(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
Normalized Un-decayed BNL Uncertainty USNO 1/R^2
Representative 1 Error for BNL Data
-31
Data from: Alburger, et al., Earth and Planet. Sci. Lett., 78, (1986) 168-176
7 Pt Avg'd Normalized BNL With Earth-Sun Distance
0.9980
0.9990
1.0000
1.0010
1.0020
0
8
/
8
1
0
2
/
8
2
0
9
/
8
2
0
3
/
8
3
1
0
/
8
3
0
4
/
8
4
1
1
/
8
4
0
6
/
8
5
1
2
/
8
5
0
7
/
8
6
Date
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

B
N
L
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1
/
R
^
2

(
a
.
u
.
^
2
)
Un-decayed 7pt avg USNO 1/R^2
-210
Data from Siegert, et al., Appl. Radiat. Isot. 49, 1397 (1998) Fig. 1
Raw Undecayed 226Ra PTB Data with Earth-Sun Distance
0.995
0.996
0.997
0.998
0.999
1
1.001
1.002
1.003
1.004
1.005
3
/
2
3
/
8
3
3
/
2
2
/
8
4
3
/
2
2
/
8
5
3
/
2
2
/
8
6
3
/
2
2
/
8
7
3
/
2
1
/
8
8
3
/
2
1
/
8
9
3
/
2
1
/
9
0
3
/
2
1
/
9
1
3
/
2
0
/
9
2
3
/
2
0
/
9
3
3
/
2
0
/
9
4
3
/
2
0
/
9
5
3
/
1
9
/
9
6
3
/
1
9
/
9
7
3
/
1
9
/
9
8
3
/
1
9
/
9
9
3
/
1
8
/
0
0
Date
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

2
2
6

R
a

D
a
t
a
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1.00
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1
/
R
2

(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
Normalized Undecayed USNO 1/R^2
-246
Data from Siegert, et al., Appl. Radiat. Isot. 49, 1397 (1998) Fig. 1
7 Pt Avg Undecayed 226Ra PTB Data with Earth-Sun Distance
0.997
0.998
0.999
1
1.001
1.002
1.003
3
/
2
3
/
8
3
3
/
2
2
/
8
4
3
/
2
2
/
8
5
3
/
2
2
/
8
6
3
/
2
2
/
8
7
3
/
2
1
/
8
8
3
/
2
1
/
8
9
3
/
2
1
/
9
0
3
/
2
1
/
9
1
3
/
2
0
/
9
2
3
/
2
0
/
9
3
3
/
2
0
/
9
4
3
/
2
0
/
9
5
3
/
1
9
/
9
6
3
/
1
9
/
9
7
3
/
1
9
/
9
8
3
/
1
9
/
9
9
3
/
1
8
/
0
0
Date
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

2
2
6

R
a

D
a
t
a
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1.00
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1
/
R
2

(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
7 pt avg normalized undecayed USNO 1/R^2
BNL/PTB Correlation
-6
BNL 32Si and PTB 226Ra Data with Earth-Sun Distance
0.998
0.999
1
1.001
1.002
1983.50 1984.00 1984.50 1985.00 1985.50 1986.00 1986.50
Date
B
N
L

a
n
d

P
T
B

U
(
t
)
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1
/
R
2

(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
Raw BNL Raw PTB USNO 1/R^2
-12
BNL 32Si and PTB 226Ra Data with Earth-Sun Distance
0.998
0.999
1
1.001
1.002
1983.50 1984.00 1984.50 1985.00 1985.50 1986.00 1986.50
Date
B
N
L

a
n
d

P
T
B

U
(
t
)
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
1.02
1.04
1.06
1
/
R
2

(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
5 Pt Avg BNL 5 Pt Avg PTB USNO 1/R^2
Data from other institutions
ELLIS: CNRC
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
0.992
0.994
0.996
0.998
1
1.002
1.004
1.006
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
1
/
R
2
(
a
.
u
.
-
2
)
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

D
e
c
a
y

D
a
t
a
Date
CNRC
238
Pu/
56
Mn Data wi th 1/R
2
Data from K. Ellis, Phys. Med. Biol., 35, 1079-1088 (1990)
OSURR
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1.00
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
0.98
0.985
0.99
0.995
1
1.005
1.01
1.015
1.02
12/31/2003 6/30/2004 12/30/2004 6/30/2005 12/30/2005 7/1/2006 12/30/2006 7/1/2007 12/31/2007 6/30/2008 12/30/2008 6/30/2009 12/30/2009
H
e
l
i
o
l
a
t
i
t
u
d
e

a
n
d

1
/
R
2
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
l
-
3
6

C
o
u
n
t
s
Date
Ohio State (Preliminary
36
Cl)
Normalized Cl-36 Counts Fxn F (Heliolatitude and 1/R2)
OSU Power Spectrum
PARKHOMOV
Parkhomov, A.G., Researches of alpha and beta radioactivity at long-term observations,
arXiv:1004.1761v1 [physics.gen-ph], (2010)
SIEGERT, PTB (EUROPIUM)
H. Siegert, et al., Appl. Rad. & Isot., 49 (1998) 1397-1401
Data Summary
Experiment Detector Type
Decay
Type
Measured
Radiation
Type
Observed
Variations
PTB (
226
Ra) Ion Chamber Gas , , Annual
PTB (
152
Eu) GeLi Solid State , Annual
BNL (
32
Si/
36
Cl) Prop. Counter Gas
-
-
Annual
Purdue (
54
Mn) NaI(Tl) Scintillator , Flare
CNRC (
56
Mn) NaI(Tl) Scintillator
-
, Annual
OSU (
36
Cl) G-M Gas
-
-
Annual
Parkhomov (
90
Sr/
90
Y-I) G-M Gas
-
-
Annual
Parkhomov (
90
Sr/
90
Y-II) G-M Gas
-
-
Annual
Parkhomov (
60
Co) G-M Gas
-
,
-
, Weak Annual
Parkhomov (
239
Pu) Si SolidState None
Possible Mechanisms
Possible Mechanisms and New
Long Range Forces
The Sun can influence nuclear decays either through
new long-range fields or through particles such as
neutrinos, axions, or other non-standard objects
If the effect arises from a new long-range field, then any
such field must have a range of ~1 a.u. Such spin-
independent fields are highly constrained.
If the sun influences nuclear decays through emission
of particles, then these can influence nuclear decays
through relatively short-range fields which tend to be
less highly constrained.
Spin-dependent long-range forces are relatively poorly
constrained, and may provide an appropriate
mechanism to explain time-varying decay rates.
Possible Mechanisms-I
Spatial Variation of the Fine Structure
Constant
This is an example of a mechanism whose
existence depends on a field whose range is
~1 a.u.
Such a field is strongly constrained by both
5
th
force type experiments, and atomic
physics experiments.
Spatial Variation of the Fine Structure
Constant alpha
For alpha decay (e.g.,
226
Ra arrow
222
Rn +
4
He)
3
1
6.3 10
4
v
Z c

From our
226
Ra data,
3 5
3 10 2 10

This may be incompatible with existing WEP and 5th force constraints.
References: D. J . Shaw, gr-qc/0702090; J .D. Barrow and D. J . Shaw,
arXiv:0806:4317; J .-P. Uzan, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 403 (2003)
Possible Mechanisms-II
Spin-dependent long range force
coupling to neutrinos
This is an example of where a spin-
dependent force of relatively short range
could provide an explanation of the decay
data.
Spin-dependent long range force
coupling to neutrinos

1. For beta-decay,
where Gamma is extremely sensitive to small
shifts in E
0
2. Assume E
0
arrow E
0
+Delat, where Delta arises
from solar neutrinos, then
3. Next, assume
where
4. For an un-polarized sample,
Variation in Solar Neutrino Flux
2 2 2
0
( )
e
d
E E m E E
dE

2 2 2
0 0 0
( ) ( ) 2 ( ) E E E E E E + +
1 2 1 2
3
[3( )( )
A
r r
r
=

1=
e
, 2= p,e,n,
e
(E
0
E)
2
(E
0
E)
2
+
2
Variation in Solar Neutrino Flux (contd)
5. Compare this to the change induced by
2 2 2 2 2
0
1
( ) ,
2
v v
For E E m m
(E
0
E)
2
(E
0
E) (E
0
E)
2
m
v
2
m
2
0
2 2 2
2 2 2
= 100 eV to 10 eV .
50 eV to 5 eV
v
m
=
This may be compatible with current limits on neutrino magnetic dipole moments.

Fischbach

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Fischbach

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Fischbach, J enkins, and Sturrock et al.

Fischbach, J enkins, and Sturrock et al.;

Вам также может понравиться