Advance Warning System For Solar Flares Hinges On Surprising Hypothesis

cylonlover writes "Scientists may have hit upon a new means of predicting solar flares more than a day in advance, which hinges on a hypothesis dating back to 2006 that solar activity affects the rate of decay of radioactive materials on Earth. Study of the phenomenon could lead to a new system which monitors changes in gamma radiation emitted from radioactive materials, and if the underlying hypothesis proves correct (abstract), this could lead to solar flare advance warning systems that would assist in the protection of satellites, power systems and astronauts."

Comments

But then

[Sulphur]

radioactive decay is not as random as we thought. So where do we get random numbers that are good?

Re:But then

[sgunhouse]

Don't be silly, it's based on neutrinos. Not that we have an effective way to block those either.

Radioactive decay generally produces neutrinos (or anti-neutrinos) as one of the decay products, hitting the nucleus with the opposite particle (anti-neutrinos if the decay would produce neutrinos, etc.) would tend to promote the decay, though obviously the nucleus is a very small target and (anti-)neutrinos do not interact strongly in any case. But if high solar activity produces an excess of neutrinos, those decays which would normally produce anti-neutrinos will be promoted, or vice versa. (Not my field hence I'm not sure which is actually involved here.)

Re:But then

[jiriw]

Ehm ... no. Atomic clocks do not work by means of radioactive decay. They work by measuring specific electron transitions in atoms through the photon radiation this phenomenon emits. That process is actually quite akin to what happens in lasers (and lasers do not use radioactive decay, except in some very specific cases as a pumping power source). Atoms used for this process are for example Rubidium and Cesium. The 'art' here is to create electron transition produced photons of such precision that their frequencies differ only minutely and be able to precisely measure that frequency of course. Things that make the measurements not as reliable as could be and thus are tried to be avoided are, amongst other things, uncontrolled movement of the atoms (resulting in doppler shift) due to too high a sample temperature (which makes the atoms move quicker and give an increased chance of collisions) and external radiation (which would include almost any type of solar radiation and certainly any type that could be of influence). So modern atomic clocks are shielded, cooled to near absolute zero and their atoms used are tried to be made to move in a very predictable way.

I'm not a scientist in the field of natural physics. Only interested in it. (Full disclosure: I did study the subject for a year but was not quick enough with the math involved and too much interested in computers)
It is very possible the oscillations in radioactive decay measured by the scientists is due to fluctuations in Neutrino emissions caused by or which also cause the solar flare. I wouldn't know any other type of solar radiation which could give an 'advanced' warning (because it is the 'first to arrive' due to going through almost everything with ease) and could influence radioactive decay even of (relatively) shielded samples.

Neutrino emissions do not (measurably) influence atomic clocks because the forces involved in the 'atomic clock process' are electromagnetic. Neutrinos only interact with atoms through the weak nuclear force which do play a role in radioactive decay.

Harness

[SJHillman]

Is there any way we could harness the power of solar flares to provide energy (either for space-based installations or to beam back to Earth)? Now if we know when they're coming farther in advance, it seems we could better take advantage of them. Not a continuous stream of energy, to be sure, but it a boost every now and then could help take the load off other sources of energy.

Not Eureka

[Relic of the Future]

The greatest discoveries don't come from a "Eureka!", but from a "Huh, that's odd..." (Be careful though, the young earthers are already jumping on this to try and disprove carbon dating.)

Constant?

[Anonymous Coward]

If this is the case, then what does this mean for dating methods that depend on decay rates?

Variable rate of decay?

[mdvolm]

If the rate of radioactive decay can vary, how would this affect things like carbon 14 dating? Very interesting.