Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

This area is for discussions involving any fusion related radiation metrology issues. Neutrons are the key signature of fusion, but other radiations are of interest to the amateur fusioneer as well.
User avatar
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 6:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Frank Sanns » Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:44 am

Prediction added to my above post.

Frank Sanns

Wilfried Heil
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 12:31 am
Real name:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Wilfried Heil » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:02 pm

There was one precision experiment to determine the gravity constant, which showed an inexplicable increase on a particular day of the week. I think it was Thursday, which turned out to be the day when the housekeeper would water the lawn.

A periodic change in solar background particles would be a possible explanation for the apparent change in decay rates, i.e. higher background counts. A temperature drift of the detector sensitivity would be another.

H. Schrader from the PTB has collected these results over 15 years and the correlation is obviously there. The cosmic ray background is also closely monitored worldwide and does not follow the same yearly rhythm as the decay rates.

User avatar
Carl Willis
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 11:33 pm
Real name: Carl Willis
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Contact:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Carl Willis » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:20 pm

Hi Wilfried,

Seems like you have looked into the "cosmic ray theory" and found that it is lacking:

>The cosmic ray background is also closely monitored worldwide and does not follow the same yearly rhythm as the decay rates.

While the "climatological theory" is another viable option, wouldn't you imagine that these issues would be taken care of? Temperature drift in electronics is one option, humidity and air density would be others (if the beta radiation is counted in air), but these would be pretty obvious and surmountable control issues in the design of the experiment. Where is Dr. Schrader's method printed?

-Carl
Carl Willis
http://carlwillis.wordpress.com/
TEL: +1-505-412-3277

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:10 pm

My first thought when I read this post was the same as Wilfrieds, that if this experiment was conducted in Germany, the lab probably has a central heating system, that switches off at night, or with the seasons.

Allthough one would hope that these variables had been eliminated.

I recall getting a nice day/night sine wave when I was plotting my vacuum leak over a period of a week, simply because the lab cooled down at night.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

JohnCuthbert
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 8:30 pm
Real name:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by JohnCuthbert » Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:12 pm

If you look at fig 3 in the report (the 266 Ra data) there's a nice sinewave which they seek to explain as related to the sun- earth distance and a big spike of roughly twice the amplitude about 1987, that they don't seem to mention (unless I missed it) . There's also a negative spike about 1998.
It would be interesting to try to think up what might have happened that caused the spikes and see if that sheds any light on the origin of the sinusoid variation.

User avatar
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 6:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Frank Sanns » Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:48 pm

John,

The years of those spikes line up with solar minima or just after in sunspot activity and at a time that the magnetic fields of the sun are switching polarity. It is an ~11 year cycle so if the data is real then they should be measuring another spike right about now. The solar minum was just reached in January so this year is prime time to see if the effect will repeat.

Also as the sunspot cycle reaches a minum, the magnetic fields and sunspots are more more aligned with the earth as they are closer to the solar equator.

Frank Sanns

John Futter
Posts: 1455
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:29 am
Real name: John Futter
Contact:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by John Futter » Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:56 pm

Richard

I get a consistant error when trying to view this file

Is it still working??

bpaddock
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:39 pm
Real name:
Contact:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by bpaddock » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:59 am

John Futter wrote:

> I get a consistant error when trying to view this file

You can download the paper from here,
Astrophysics section of Cornell:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283v1

Pick PDF or PostScript if you have GhostScript/GhostView on the top right.

bpaddock
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:39 pm
Real name:
Contact:

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by bpaddock » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:59 am

John Futter wrote:

> I get a consistant error when trying to view this file

You can download the paper from here,
Astrophysics section of Cornell:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3283v1

Pick PDF or PostScript if you have GhostScript/GhostView on the top right.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11610
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Paper linking rad decay rate to sun-earth distance?!

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:36 pm

I just returned to my work e-mail. This subject is most interesting and we will have a lot of questions as will many scientists.

I have found that some of the largest CME's occur in the waning part of the solar cycle.
I would love to see how these affect the result. We had a couple of monster CME's a couple of years back and boosted my lab's neutron background count 3-4X!! The ticket would be to see a relatively short lived isotope tested during or near a CME.

Before the crowd looking at remediation claims of nuclear materials chimes in, the bulk of such claims are totally bogus and done by folks who haven't got a clue about what they are doing.

I had to tell one guy who approached me saying he remediated U ore to a rayless state, chemically, by noting that he had washed away the bulk of the beta emitting daughters and that his trusty CV-700 would not see the remaining U alphas.

This was noted early in the 1900's when Sir William Crooks rendered uranium "rayless" by perciptating out the heavy beta emitters, short lived.Th234 and Pa234 from urnaium metal.

Carl's own U extraction results were not very active until the samples I obtained were 4-5 months old when all the above isotopes had "grown" back into the samples.

I also do not attach any link or significance to this paper's results associated to the variable nature of the CANR-LENR results. As the results are most likely do to more gross elements within the experiments themselves.

I found the paper fascinating and pregnant with possiblities. The root cause will either amuse us mightily when found as error on behalf of the researchers or change a lot of notions about stars and matter at some significant level.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Post Reply