Comprehensive coverage

Does the geological clock based on the half-life of radioactive materials need to be recalibrated?

Are events in the distant past, such as the extinction of the dinosaurs, about ten percent closer in time to us? And how does it relate to solar flares? This is according to ongoing research by a group headed by Prof. Yitzhak Orion from Ben Gurion University. In an interview with the Hidan site, Prof. Orion also explains the role of the neutrino particle in the phenomenon

Prof. Yitzhak Orion, photo: Danny Machlis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Prof. Yitzhak Orion, photo: Danny Machlis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

A research group led by Prof. Yitzhak Orion from the Nuclear Engineering Unit at Ben-Gurion University discovered a negative correlation between solar flares and the radiation emitted by radioactive materials.

The research began as a collaboration with the late Dr. Gideon Steinitz from the Geological Survey of Israel and the team also includes the doctoral student, Yonatan Valach and the master's degree students, Anatoli Rodinansky and Yael Peleg, from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

In an interview with the Hidan website, Prof. Orion explains that the ongoing experiment in the soil condenser proved this, and now the geologists may be able to reconcile the discrepancy between the dated age of the layer and the fossils within it.

In an underground laboratory at Ben-Gurion University in the Negev, a group of researchers discovered that the cause of the decrease in radioactive radiation is the emission of neutrino particles during a solar flare. The discovery raises questions about the age of the Earth and the age of the dinosaur remains. As mentioned the bottom line, it is possible that the famous event occurred not 66 million years ago but about 58-60 million years ago. Even more backwards, the first dinosaur also walked the earth 20-50 million years later than the estimate so far.

Tabletop neutrino detector

Solar flare - the emitted neutrino crosses the Earth. . Image:
A solar flare - the emitted neutrino crosses the Earth. . Image:

To this day it is claimed that the tiny substance in nature, neutrino, has no charge and therefore it is not possible to detect it in observations except by using hundreds of tons of clean matter. However, Prof. Orion's research group from the Nuclear Engineering Unit built a tiny detector, and despite that managed to detect neutrino impact events.

Through a series of experiments in which they placed a detector the size of a liter and a half bottle and next to it they placed radioactive materials of small to tiny size, once every fifteen minutes the gamma radiation of that tiny source is measured.

The researchers were able to confirm not only that many radioactive substances are directly affected by solar flares, but that due to changes in the neutrino flux from the sun, the half-life of the substance changes and, as mentioned, the radioactive activity actually slows down somewhat.

According to Prof. Orion, the phenomenon was not expected, since the assumption was that the detector would receive increased radiation, not reduced as a result of increased radiation coming from the environment. Instead, we got a decrease in the radioactivity readings, which we compared against a database of solar flares measured by NASA satellites. He adds that the phenomenon was consistent when the researchers used several types of radioactive materials. The only difference was the time it took for the lactone activity to subside after the solar storm. In the case of radon, for example, it is hours.

The new findings cast doubt on the reliability of the dating methods used so far because the further back in time the solar storms were stronger, as it too undergoes an evolutionary process.

Geological dating makes use of half-lives of radioactive substances

Geological dating with radioactive methods makes use of half-lives of radioactive materials. The basic premise underlying the geological dating method is that half-life is a constant that is not affected by anything, but in light of the new findings the question arises - is it really so?

"Geology encounters quite a few difficulties because of a discrepancy between the ages of rocks through geological dating and the findings in the field," explains Prof. Yitzhak Orion. "It is possible that the scientific breakthrough achieved here will introduce a new order in geological dating, not only in terms of the true age of the dinosaurs, but in everything we know today about the chronology of the Earth."

"The phenomenon was first discovered by the physicist Prof. Ephraim Fischbach from Purdue University in the USA, but he did not know what to associate it with," explains Prof. Orion. We actually published the results we got in a journal and also in a file at an international conference. We provided two types of results from two sources and noted that we are able to identify the connection between the descents and solar flares. Since the system is protected in a 5 meter thick concrete shell and in addition the system itself is surrounded by lead, the only particle that may pass through it and interfere is the neutrino. In fact, by measuring the radiation from the source attached to the detector, we can measure the neutrino effects that occur during a solar flare."

Have you actually developed a compact and cheap neutrino detector?

This is a device that has a volume of several liters. A small table with the radioactive source and a detector the size of a liter and a half bottle. It is indeed difficult to discover neutrinos, but the innovation is that we show that it is possible to easily measure its effect on radioactive sources.

If a radiation source suffers from a decrease in radiation rate and does not emit the radiation expected from it, its half-life also changes. This leads us to conclude that when geologically dating rocks underground and using the natural radioactive sources found within them, there will be a significant deviation as to the date the rock was formed.

That's why we also turned to check substances that are common in ancient rocks, for example thorium or potash that are naturally radioactive, and we discovered that these substances, which are used for geological dating, are also affected by solar flares.

Since I am not a geologist but I have talked a lot with geologists, in fact the start of the process started with the relationship I had with the late Dr. Gidi Steinitz who was formerly the head of the Geological Institute.

Black hole neutrinos

About two weeks ago, we reported on the Hedaan website about a study with the participation of researchers from the Hebrew University and the Weizmann Institute, who were partners in an international project Neutrino particles from a black hole eruption event whose echoes reached us in 2019 were measured.

Neutrinos from a black hole explosion at the center of a galaxy

Prof. Orion entered the original scientific article, and took from there the data on the neutrino's arrival date, and it turns out that in that time period there was indeed an anomaly in the measurements that could not be explained by a solar eruption, it turns out that neutrinos from deep space can also be detected in this tiny facility.

And of course, before the creationists start rejoicing that the Earth, or at least the life on it, is younger than we have believed so far. Even a reduction of tens of millions of years will not fit into the time frame of 6,000 years that the creation story in the Bible assigns to this.

for the scientific article

More of the topic in Hayadan:

32 תגובות

  1. In your calendar, the time is every day = 1000 years, so you can add a few more zeros and reach the desired number.
    They also lived longer than us.
    And in general, the main question is not whether he created or not.
    In the end they will all meet in Rome. All paths will lead to the same solution.

  2. Why do creationists have to be pushed everywhere? Scientists can't write an article free of politics?
    Why is it so hard? This is what you think, this is what you believe, be proud of your opinions.
    What do you care what the opponent from the divisive school of thought thinks? Enough of the politicization of science.

  3. A. Very happy to read the article. I have always been told that the half-life does not change in any way due to any external factor. And so this means that radioactive dating is very accurate. And this causes some 'difficulties' in Torah and science. Already many years ago, the Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote in reference to the subject, that the scientific conclusion on the subject uses a relatively weak scientific inference tool called 'extrapolation'. This means drawing conclusions outside the measurement range. If we measured radioactive radiation for 120 years and it always turned out that the half-life is constant, and we also conclude this about one minute before the first measurement, this is an extrapolation. This is very likely but less than 'interpolation' and even less than other methods. But as long as I throw the law that I deduced from the observations further back to the extent of millions and billions of years, the extrapolation loses its validity, because there is no information about what happened in the past. Specifically about radioactive dating, the Rebbe wrote that it is likely that the physical conditions in ancient times could have been radically different to today, so that the environment would affect the rate of decay, in ways that are not familiar to us today. [You can find the Lubavitch Rebbe's letter in the book 'Gates of Faith' and the book 'Faith and Science']. I was very happy to see that for the first time science is questioning the rule that the half-life is fixed, a rule that science formulated [in humility - as if it were a final and absolute and unquestionable rule] based on many observations, but limited to a time of 120 years.

  4. To my father: I have no complaints about the approval of the comments, I just wanted to sound a little less stupid than I seem.

  5. Thank God, there are serious commenters here, the kind who are able to accept or reject an article (PEER REVIEWERS), and yet, in the case of such an extreme claim, it is recommended to already include in the article the opinion of a professor from the field who was not involved in the research.

  6. One should refer to the Ramban and the Sephorano at the beginning of Parashat Beresheet (on the verse "And man shall be a living soul") who explicitly wrote that at first man was still and then moved like an animal on all fours and we see here that there is no contradiction between this and Darwin's famous theory because as mentioned we do not know how God created the most correct thing It is done according to natural processes as the scientists really see, except that God's providence is expressed in the timing. The formation of light that is said to have occurred on the first day is the result of the difference between matter and antimatter and the creation of photons that happened after the big bang. A process for the formation of life on earth in the idea of ​​the whole story of creation fits very well with the data of science except for one thing and that is the order of the third and fourth day which is currently difficult to explain how there were trees and fruits etc. before there were lights like the sun and moon but it must be attributed to the lack of knowledge because there is a complete logical proof For the existence of the Creator and whoever wants me to write it then write here and I will explain briefly

  7. Something fundamental is not clear to me
    I would appreciate it if you could correct me or explain to me

    According to the article, neutrino radiation suppresses the radioactive decays and slows them down.
    So there is more material left that hasn't broken down.
    That is, the half-life is lengthened
    That is, if we find today a substance whose half has decayed, then this time is longer than the theoretical half-life
    That means that the time that passed is longer and not shorter

    That means the dinosaurs lived tens of millions of years before what we thought until now and not after.
    So what and why are creationists happy??

  8. Does anyone know anything about the GSC online press magazine? I would expect such a study to be published in nature or science

  9. To Yehuda Elide: It's good to read also serious comments in the night of religious nonsense. I also agree with the fact that it is too early to be happy ("extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" as Sagan said), and also that if it coincides it will be a revolution that will win Prof. Orion in the Nobel Prize.

  10. It seems that the statistical significance of the result of this experiment is weak, as was written above about Yehuda Elide.
    In fact, this is the real title at the moment, which was not found to be sufficiently clear.
    Such an extraordinary claim needs extraordinary proof. Until then, and until proven otherwise, even though the experiment is very beautiful, its definite partiality is in the possession of BAD SCIENCE

  11. Nev - according to the graphs in the original article, the effect of the neutrino is temporary, there is a drop for a moment (indicated by red arrows) and then back to the same slope. According to the graph, the neutrino does not seem to change its half-life regularly.

  12. Leon - the level of radioactive material in the rocks on Earth did not start with the Big Bang, but during the formation of the Earth and/or the solar system and/or rather the nuclear reactions that created the material that created the Earth or the asteroids that collided with it later and created some of the minerals that is on earth.
    The dating according to radioactive carbon is not related to the age of the earth, but is based on the carbon in the atmosphere (carbon dioxide) which due to the sun's radiation creates a constant percentage of radioactive carbon and the assumption that this percentage is always constant - the carbon from the atmosphere is absorbed by plants and passes to the animals and so on and so on in every Period The percentage of radioactive carbon in all the organic matter on Earth contains the same level of radioactive carbon as it was in the atmosphere at that time.
    The carbon that is in the atmosphere today is largely from fuels that are derived from petroleum that is derived from fossils and which contain carbon from millions of years ago with a different level of radiation, this is absorbed by plants and radiation.

  13. Nev - There are already more modern creationists who have abandoned the theory that the flat world was created 5000 years ago, and who are trying to deny evolution with the help of an alternative theory about "alien" beings who brought life here or only created man through genetic mutations and genetic experiments on Earth...

  14. The calculation from the creation of the world 5000 or 6000... is based on a simple calculation of adding the ages of the people mentioned in the Torah, according to the story some of them lived hundreds of years and so on. This account ignores the fact that the entire Torah, apart from the Ten Commandments which were written on stone, was a Torah in Elpa, until during the time of King David they decided to put it down in writing, and everything was written retrospectively relying on people's memories.
    (Proof of this is the writing in the past tense and that from time to time an explanation is written that "in those days it was like this and like that...")

  15. Following on from my father's question...
    If the origin of the materials on Earth originates - ultimately from the bang...
    Were the materials that made up the dinosaurs actually millions of years old because they came from deep space?

  16. "6000 years that the creation story in the Bible assigns to this."
    The date according to Judaism that we count until today 5781 is not the age of the world
    but a date from the creation of the first man and does not include the "6 days" that preceded it.
    These are not days as we understand them today (the sun and moon were only created on the fourth "day")
    To understand in a good way what the Torah says and not at the level of a child in kindergarten
    I highly recommend listening to Rabbi Zamir Cohen's lecture on YouTube - The Creation of the Universe and the Age of the World
    Later you will understand that there is really nothing to argue about here
    It is important to hear all opinions
    All the best

  17. From the article:
    Received on October 11, 2020; revised on October 22, 2020; accepted on 24 October 2020

    An experimental article accepted for a journal without an impact factor within 13 days.

    I rest my case.

  18. The "creationists" cannot rejoice, since the creation of the universe (the big bang or rather the inflation) took place 13.7 billion years ago.
    At the same time, science does not contradict the belief in the existence of "God". It definitely contradicts the biblical story of creation. The authors are there (there are actually two stories of creation that contradict each other). They did not understand at all that creation is first of all the creation of space-time...
    The Bible is not the words of God, but the words of ancient people's thoughts about God.

  19. If the amazing observation (that the neutrino flux in the cosmological background affects the half-life of radioactive substances and the time lengthens when the flux increases) is confirmed by colleagues who will repeat the experiment and prove that the phenomenon is real, this is a "paradigm change", that is, an experimental result that should lead to a reexamination of basic concepts of particle physics (like, that the decay of a neutron into a proton + electron is fissile and cannot be attributed to an observable mechanism and certainly not a predictable one) - and as we know, paradigm revolutions are extremely rare and conservative scientists abhor them. Therefore, before starting to celebrate the Nobel Prize that is coming to Beer Sheva in Agala and during Karib, to take a deep breath and show that the result is traceable at a level of probability of at least 5 sigma.

  20. Mr. Blizovsky, I understand that Politrock like you is not willing to publish comments that do not fit your religion. You can't be confused with facts. Huh? You are no different from the ultra-Orthodox, just a different religion.

  21. Is there also an effect on carbon 14 dating? Regarding much closer events on the order of thousands and hundreds of years? Is there a way to correct the error by simulations of the evolution of solar storms?

  22. "And of course, before the creationists start rejoicing that the earth..."
    Even a journey of a thousand miles begins with one small step
    Little by little you will reach us

  23. "And of course, before the creationists start rejoicing that the Earth, or at least the life on it, is younger than we believed until now. Even a reduction of tens of millions of years will not fit into the time frame of 6,000 years that the creation story in the Bible assigns to this." - Not their creation, of course, but for the sake of discussion, let's assume that in the distant past - perhaps 10 million years ago - a super nova occurred at a distance of about 150 light years from Earth - after all, super novae produce more neutrinos than what our sun can produce in such an eruption. Couldn't such a situation result in a far wrong date, not by 10% here or there, but by 50% or even 70%?

  24. interesting. Like the opposite of what you would expect. You need to check the controls carefully and create additional controls. It would certainly be significant to find that neutrino storms affect the half-life of matter

  25. So could it be that the earth is thousands of years old and not billions??

    Because at the moment no one knows how to give an exact answer as to the size of the deviation

  26. In connection with radiocarbon dating
    Is the fact that in recent years we have been polluting the atmosphere with fossil-derived carbons? And this is the carbon that is also absorbed by plants and all organic matter and it is actually carbon that is millions of years old... Won't this change the results of radioactive carbon dating of organic matter of this period.
    For example, if we test a paper from a decade ago, it will be able to show in the test that it is older than paper from a hundred or a thousand years ago, because most of the carbon that makes it up is fossil carbon.

  27. Even the creationists do not think that the world was created in six thousand years. What is unlikely in their eyes is how life was created in such a short time as a few tens of millions of years. Now, if we sum up the years of human work, they are also several tens of millions of years and man did not even come close to creating life

  28. On the fourth day it is said "there will be lights in the firmament of the sky", so it is clear that the definition of the days of the first week of creation is not as simple as that. There is no limit to define according to the Torah the duration of the first week in billions of years

  29. Creationists do not need to "start" to rejoice.
    They are always happy.
    There was a debate of about three thousand years between Judaism and the "scientists of the world" beginning with Aristotle and ending with modern scientists about a century ago who claimed with "scientific" fervor that the world was ancient.
    Today, it is clear to every bird that the world began at a certain point.
    The creationists won.
    It can also be said that the beginning of admitting science in the world that started at a certain point, probably gave us the biggest historical mistake.
    A scientific error of about years (in seconds it sounds worse...)
    The first estimate spoke of 1.8 billion years (and Einstein at the time claimed that this was an impossible statement that jeopardized the whole theory because the geological age of rocks was then 2.3 billion).
    Today we are talking about
    Everyone admits that at least the beginning of the process was not subject to the laws of physics as they are known today.
    For example, there is a statement that during 10 to the power of 26 seconds after the start of the process, matter reached a distance of 4 light years, etc.
    No one can put their finger on when the "process" of the explosion is considered and what is considered a "normal situation" subject to our laws of physics.
    Good Day

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.