
Do nuclear decay rates depend on our distance from the sun? - rms
http://arxivblog.com/?p=596
======
pmorici
Does this mean that carbon dating isn't as accurate as they thought if this is
true?

~~~
Eliezer
I 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
No, 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.

------
randallsquared
I really, really hope this is true. :) Nuclear-weapon suppression field,
anyone?

~~~
steelhive
You 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
Given 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
_I'm not sure if anyone's used nuclear-powered spacecraft closer to the sun_

<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.

------
hugh
Probably 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
More likely to produce interesting results in a timely fashion, eh? :)

~~~
hugh
Rocket + radioactive silicon + crashing into the sun = all possible flavours
of awesome.

I can't think of any better way to spend $200 million.

------
albertcardona
_Unexplained 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>

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.

