UPDATE: New Study Suggest Cosmic Ray Origin Now Include ‘Dark Matter’

Observing the constant rain of cosmic rays hitting Earth can provide information on the “magnetic weather” in other parts of the Galaxy. A new high-precision measurement of two cosmic-ray elements, boron and carbon, supports a specific model of the magnetic turbulence that deflects cosmic rays on their journey through the Galaxy.

dark-matter3-science-of-cycles

The data, which come from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) aboard the International Space Station, appear to rule out alternative models for cosmic-ray propagation. By ruling out these models, the AMS results support the alternative explanation – a new primary cosmic ray source that emits positrons. Candidates include pulsars and dark matter, but a lot of mystery still surrounds the unexplained positron data.

The majority of cosmic rays are particles or nuclei produced in supernovae or other astrophysical sources. However, as these so-called primary cosmic rays travel through the Galaxy to Earth, they collide with gas atoms in the interstellar medium. The collisions produce a secondary class of cosmic rays with masses and energies that differ from primary cosmic rays.

interstellar-collision-science_of_cycles

To investigate the relationship of the two classes, astrophysicists often look at the ratio of the number of detection’s of two nuclei, such as boron and carbon. For the most part, carbon cosmic rays have a primary origin, whereas boron is almost exclusively created in secondary processes. A relatively high boron-to-carbon (B/C) ratio in a certain energy range implies that the relevant cosmic rays are traversing a lot of gas before reaching us. “The B/C ratio tells you how cosmic rays propagate through space,” says AMS principal investigator Samuel Ting of MIT.

Previous measurements of the B/C ratio have had large errors of 15% or more, especially at high energy, mainly because of the brief data collection time available for balloon-based detectors. But the AMS has been operating on the Space Station for five years, and over this time it has collected more than 80 billion cosmic rays. The AMS detectors measure the charges of these cosmic rays, allowing the elements to be identified. The collaboration has detected over ten million carbon and boron nuclei, with energies per nucleon ranging from a few hundred MeV up to a few TeV.

The B/C ratio decreases with energy because higher-energy cosmic rays tend to take a more direct path to us (and therefore experience fewer collisions producing boron). By contrast, lower-energy cosmic rays are diverted more strongly by magnetic fields, so they bounce around like pinballs among magnetic turbulence regions in the Galaxy. Several theories have been proposed to describe the size and spacing of these turbulent regions, and these theories lead to predictions for the energy dependence of the B/C ratio. However, previous B/C observations have not been precise enough to favor one theory over another. The AMS data show very clearly that the B/C ratio is proportional to the energy raised to the -1/3 power. This result matches a prediction based on a theory of magnetohydrodynamics developed in 1941 by the Russian mathematician Andrey Kolmogorov.

These results conflict with models that predict that the B/C ratio should exhibit some more complex energy dependence, such as kinks in the B/C spectrum at specific energies. Theorists proposed these models to explain anomalous observations – by AMS and other experiments – that showed an increase in the number of positrons (anti-electrons) reaching Earth relative to electrons at high energy. The idea was that these “excess” positrons are – like boron – produced in collisions between cosmic rays and interstellar gas. But such a scenario would require that cosmic rays encounter additional scattering sites, not just magnetically turbulent regions. By ruling out these models, the AMS results support the alternative explanation – a new primary cosmic ray source that emits positrons. Candidates include pulsars and dark matter, but a lot of mystery still surrounds the unexplained positron data.

Igor Moskalenko from Stanford University is very surprised at the close match between the data and the Kolmogorov model. He expected that the ratio would deviate from a single power law in a way that might provide clues to the origin of the excess positrons. “This is a dramatic result that should lead to much better understanding of interstellar magnetohydrodynamic turbulence and propagation of cosmic rays,” he says. “On the other hand, it is very much unexpected in that it makes recent discoveries in astrophysics of cosmic rays even more puzzling.”

More Hints of Exotic Cosmic-Ray Origin

Observing the constant rain of cosmic rays hitting Earth can provide information on the “magnetic weather” in other parts of the Galaxy. A new high-precision measurement of two cosmic-ray elements, boron and carbon, supports a specific model of the magnetic turbulence that deflects cosmic rays on their journey through the Galaxy.

dark-matter3-science-of-cycles

The data, which come from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) aboard the International Space Station, appear to rule out alternative models for cosmic-ray propagation. By ruling out these models, the AMS results support the alternative explanation – a new primary cosmic ray source that emits positrons. Candidates include pulsars and dark matter, but a lot of mystery still surrounds the unexplained positron data.

The majority of cosmic rays are particles or nuclei produced in supernovae or other astrophysical sources. However, as these so-called primary cosmic rays travel through the Galaxy to Earth, they collide with gas atoms in the interstellar medium. The collisions produce a secondary class of cosmic rays with masses and energies that differ from primary cosmic rays.

interstellar-collision-science_of_cycles

To investigate the relationship of the two classes, astrophysicists often look at the ratio of the number of detection’s of two nuclei, such as boron and carbon. For the most part, carbon cosmic rays have a primary origin, whereas boron is almost exclusively created in secondary processes. A relatively high boron-to-carbon (B/C) ratio in a certain energy range implies that the relevant cosmic rays are traversing a lot of gas before reaching us. “The B/C ratio tells you how cosmic rays propagate through space,” says AMS principal investigator Samuel Ting of MIT.

Previous measurements of the B/C ratio have had large errors of 15% or more, especially at high energy, mainly because of the brief data collection time available for balloon-based detectors. But the AMS has been operating on the Space Station for five years, and over this time it has collected more than 80 billion cosmic rays. The AMS detectors measure the charges of these cosmic rays, allowing the elements to be identified. The collaboration has detected over ten million carbon and boron nuclei, with energies per nucleon ranging from a few hundred MeV up to a few TeV.

The B/C ratio decreases with energy because higher-energy cosmic rays tend to take a more direct path to us (and therefore experience fewer collisions producing boron). By contrast, lower-energy cosmic rays are diverted more strongly by magnetic fields, so they bounce around like pinballs among magnetic turbulence regions in the Galaxy. Several theories have been proposed to describe the size and spacing of these turbulent regions, and these theories lead to predictions for the energy dependence of the B/C ratio. However, previous B/C observations have not been precise enough to favor one theory over another. The AMS data show very clearly that the B/C ratio is proportional to the energy raised to the -1/3 power. This result matches a prediction based on a theory of magnetohydrodynamics developed in 1941 by the Russian mathematician Andrey Kolmogorov.

These results conflict with models that predict that the B/C ratio should exhibit some more complex energy dependence, such as kinks in the B/C spectrum at specific energies. Theorists proposed these models to explain anomalous observations – by AMS and other experiments – that showed an increase in the number of positrons (anti-electrons) reaching Earth relative to electrons at high energy. The idea was that these “excess” positrons are – like boron – produced in collisions between cosmic rays and interstellar gas. But such a scenario would require that cosmic rays encounter additional scattering sites, not just magnetically turbulent regions. By ruling out these models, the AMS results support the alternative explanation – a new primary cosmic ray source that emits positrons. Candidates include pulsars and dark matter, but a lot of mystery still surrounds the unexplained positron data.

Igor Moskalenko from Stanford University is very surprised at the close match between the data and the Kolmogorov model. He expected that the ratio would deviate from a single power law in a way that might provide clues to the origin of the excess positrons. “This is a dramatic result that should lead to much better understanding of interstellar magnetohydrodynamic turbulence and propagation of cosmic rays,” he says. “On the other hand, it is very much unexpected in that it makes recent discoveries in astrophysics of cosmic rays even more puzzling.”

Powerful Punch of Gamma Rays Found in Mysterious Fast Radio Bursts

Penn State University astronomers have discovered that the mysterious “cosmic whistles” known as fast radio bursts can pack a serious punch, in some cases releasing a billion times more energy in gamma-rays than they do in radio waves and rivaling the stellar cataclysms known as supernovae in their explosive power. The discovery, the first-ever finding of non-radio emission from any fast radio burst, drastically raises the stakes for models of fast radio bursts and is expected to further energize efforts by astronomers to chase down and identify long-lived counterparts to fast radio bursts using X-ray, optical, and radio telescopes.

fast-radio-burst-csiro-parkes-telescope

Fast radio bursts, which astronomers refer to as FRBs, were first discovered in 2007, and in the years since radio astronomers have detected a few dozen of these events. Although they last mere milliseconds at any single frequency, their great distances from Earth — and large quantities of intervening plasma — delay their arrival at lower frequencies, spreading the signal out over a second or more and yielding a distinctive downward-swooping “whistle” across the typical radio receiver band.

“This discovery revolutionizes our picture of FRBs, some of which apparently manifest as both a whistle and a bang,” said coauthor Derek Fox, a Penn State professor of astronomy and astrophysics. The radio whistle can be detected by ground-based radio telescopes, while the gamma-ray bang can be picked up by high-energy satellites like NASA’s Swift mission. “Rate and distance estimates for FRBs suggest that, whatever they are, they are a relatively common phenomenon, occurring somewhere in the universe more than 2,000 times a day.”

fast-radio-burst2

Efforts to identify FRB counterparts began soon after their discovery but have all come up empty until now. In a paper recently published in Astrophysical Journal Letters the Penn State team, led by physics graduate student James DeLaunay, reports bright gamma-ray emission from the fast radio burst FRB 131104, named after the date it occurred, 4 November 2013. “I started this search for FRB counterparts without expecting to find anything,” said DeLaunay. “This burst was the first that even had useful data to analyse. When I saw that it showed a possible gamma-ray counterpart, I couldn’t believe my luck!”

_soc_page

Discovery of the gamma-ray “bang” from FRB 131104, the first non-radio counterpart to any FRB, was made possible by NASA’s Earth-orbiting Swift satellite, which was observing the exact part of the sky where FRB 131104 occurred as the burst was detected by the Parkes Observatory radio telescope in Parkes, Australia. “Swift is always watching the sky for bursts of X-rays and gamma-rays,” said Neil Gehrels, the mission’s principal investigator and chief of the Astroparticle Physics Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “What a delight it was to catch this flash from one of the mysterious fast radio bursts.”

“Although theorists had anticipated that FRBs might be accompanied by gamma rays, the gamma-ray emission we see from FRB 131104 is surprisingly long-lasting and bright,” Fox said. The duration of the gamma-ray emission, at two to six minutes, is many times the millisecond duration of the radio emission. And the gamma-ray emission from FRB 131104 outshines its radio emissions by more than a billion times, dramatically raising estimates of the burst’s energy requirements and suggesting severe consequences for the burst’s surroundings and host galaxy.

Two common models for gamma-ray emission from FRBs exist: one invoking magnetic flare events from magnetars — highly magnetized neutron stars that are the dense remnants of collapsed stars — and another invoking the catastrophic merger of two neutron stars, colliding to form a black hole. According to coauthor Kohta Murase, a Penn State professor and theorist, “The energy release we see is challenging for the magnetar model unless the burst is relatively nearby. The long timescale of the gamma-ray emission, while unexpected in both models, might be possible in a merger event if we observe the merger from the side, in an off-axis scenario.”

“In fact, the energy and timescale of the gamma-ray emission is a better match to some types of supernovae, or to some of the supermassive black hole accretion events that Swift has seen,” Fox said. “The problem is that no existing models predict that we would see an FRB in these cases.”

The bright gamma-ray emission from FRB 131104 suggests that the burst, and others like it, might be accompanied by long-lived X-ray, optical, or radio emissions. Such counterparts are dependably seen in the wake of comparably energetic cosmic explosions, including both stellar-scale cataclysms — supernovae, magnetar flares, and gamma-ray bursts — and episodic or continuous accretion activity of the supermassive black holes that commonly lurk in the centers of galaxies.

In fact, Swift X-ray and optical observations were carried out two days after FRB 131104, thanks to prompt analysis by radio astronomers (who were not aware of the gamma-ray counterpart) and a nimble response from the Swift mission operations team, headquartered at Penn State. In spite of this relatively well-coordinated response, no long-lived X-ray, ultraviolet, or optical counterpart was seen.

The authors hope to participate in future campaigns aimed at discovering more FRB counterparts, and in this way, finally revealing the sources responsible for these ubiquitous and mysterious events. “Ideally, these campaigns would begin soon after the burst and would continue for several weeks afterward to make sure nothing gets missed. Maybe we’ll get even luckier next time,” DeLaunay said.

New Theory of Gravity Might Explain Dark Matter

A new theory of gravity might explain the curious motions of stars in galaxies. Emergent gravity, as the new theory is called, predicts the exact same deviation of motions that is usually explained by invoking dark matter. Prof. Erik Verlinde, renowned expert in string theory at the University of Amsterdam and the Delta Institute for Theoretical Physics, published a new research paper today in which he expands his groundbreaking views on the nature of gravity.

gravity-new-theory

In 2010, Erik Verlinde surprised the world with a completely new theory of gravity. According to Verlinde, gravity is not a fundamental force of nature, but an emergent phenomenon. In the same way that temperature arises from the movement of microscopic particles, gravity emerges from the changes of fundamental bits of information, stored in the very structure of spacetime.

Newton’s law from information

In his 2010 article (On the origin of gravity and the laws of Newton), Verlinde showed how Newton’s famous second law, which describes how apples fall from trees and satellites stay in orbit, can be derived from these underlying microscopic building blocks. Extending his previous work and work done by others, Verlinde now shows how to understand the curious behaviour of stars in galaxies without adding the puzzling dark matter.

The outer regions of galaxies, like our own Milky Way, rotate much faster around the centre than can be accounted for by the quantity of ordinary matter like stars, planets and interstellar gasses. Something else has to produce the required amount of gravitational force, so physicists proposed the existence of dark matter. Dark matter seems to dominate our universe, comprising more than 80 percent of all matter. Hitherto, the alleged dark matter particles have never been observed, despite many efforts to detect them.

No need for dark matter

According to Erik Verlinde, there is no need to add a mysterious dark matter particle to the theory. In a new paper, which appeared today on the ArXiv preprint server, Verlinde shows how his theory of gravity accurately predicts the velocities by which the stars rotate around the center of the Milky Way, as well as the motion of stars inside other galaxies.

“We have evidence that this new view of gravity actually agrees with the observations, ” says Verlinde. “At large scales, it seems, gravity just doesn’t behave the way Einstein’s theory predicts.”

At first glance, Verlinde’s theory presents features similar to modified theories of gravity like MOND (modified Newtonian Dynamics, Mordehai Milgrom (1983)). However, where MOND tunes the theory to match the observations, Verlinde’s theory starts from first principles. “A totally different starting point,” according to Verlinde.

Adapting the holographic principle

One of the ingredients in Verlinde’s theory is an adaptation of the holographic principle, introduced by his tutor Gerard ‘t Hooft (Nobel Prize 1999, Utrecht University) and Leonard Susskind (Stanford University). According to the holographic principle, all the information in the entire universe can be described on a giant imaginary sphere around it. Verlinde now shows that this idea is not quite correct – part of the information in our universe is contained in space itself.

This extra information is required to describe that other dark component of the universe: Dark energy, which is believed to be responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe. Investigating the effects of this additional information on ordinary matter, Verlinde comes to a stunning conclusion. Whereas ordinary gravity can be encoded using the information on the imaginary sphere around the universe, as he showed in his 2010 work, the result of the additional information in the bulk of space is a force that nicely matches that attributed to dark matter.

On the brink of a scientific revolution

Gravity is in dire need of new approaches like the one by Verlinde, since it doesn’t combine well with quantum physics. Both theories, crown jewels of 20th century physics, cannot be true at the same time. The problems arise in extreme conditions: near black holes, or during the Big Bang. Verlinde says, “Many theoretical physicists like me are working on a revision of the theory, and some major advancements have been made. We might be standing on the brink of a new scientific revolution that will radically change our views on the very nature of space, time and gravity.”

Russian Scientists Use Cosmic Rays to Forecast Hurricanes

Scientists from the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Russia) appear to have found a way to better predict hurricanes by measuring changes in the atmosphere which precede giant atmospheric vortexes with air pressure subsiding to the center with very high speed of the airflow.

muon-detector1

This can now be done with the use of a ‘muon hodoscope’. Muons are a byproduct of cosmic rays particles. A hodoscope is a type of detector commonly used in particle physics that make use of an array of detectors to determine the trajectory of an energetic particle – in this case cosmic rays.

heliosphere5

Lead researcher Professor Igor Yashin of Moscow Engineering Physics Institute states: “The hurricane muon hodoscope is able to observe and analyze – on a real-time basis, modulations of the flow of secondary cosmic rays on the Earth’s surface provoked by processes in the heliosphere, magnetosphere and atmosphere of Earth. The uniqueness of our hodoscope is that in the real-time mode, it allows reconstruction of each muon’s track and obtaining muonographs.

cyclone-catarina_m

It is hard to overstate the necessity of precise hurricane forecasting. Before artificial satellites, the only way to track hurricanes was via airplanes flying above the cyclones. But even today, satellites can’t provide comprehensive information. For example, they can’t detect the inner barometric pressure of the hurricane or the exact wind speed. Moreover, thick clouds obscure nascent cyclones from satellites. Despite the availability of satellite systems, sensors, and radars, aviation still plays an important role in forecasting.

cosmic-ray-muon-hodoscope

According to scientists, the new hodoscope provides precise forecasts. To watch the atmosphere over Russia, which spans 10,625,447,387 miles (17.1 million km), the need for four hodoscopes are required. Considering that hurricanes are a fraction of that size, and the majority of tropical cyclones are formed between 10 and 30 degrees of latitude of both hemispheres, the number of hodoscope necessary to monitor this territory is low.

“Muon diagnostics developed at MEPhI offers the possibility to model the flow of cosmic rays in the atmosphere and magnetosphere. But to study such processes, it is necessary to create a network of similar, adjustable muon hodoscopes. Such hodoscopes were developed at MEPhI,” Yashin says.

_______________________

_science-of-cycles24_m

*Be part of keeping ‘Science of Cycles’ alive and free. Your support is needed to keep this unique and valuable resource.

*Help sponsor us with your pledge -as you see fit to the value you receive- from our news service.

no-paypal-account-needed_sm

If above banner does not work – CLICK HERE

 

PART-II Nearby Supernovae Found to have Affected Life on Earth

The surface of the Earth was immersed in life-damaging radiation from nearby supernovae on several different occasions over the past nine million years. That is the claim of an international team of astronomers, which has created a computer model that suggests that high-energy particles from the supernovae created ionizing radiation in Earth’s atmosphere that reached ground level. This influx of radiation, the astronomers say, potentially changed the course of the Earth’s climate and the evolution of life.

neutronstar

Earlier this year, two independent teams of astronomers published evidence that several supernovae had exploded some 330 light-years from Earth. Each event showered the solar system in iron-60, an overabundance of which has been found in core samples from the bottom of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans. A discovery of the same element ‘iron-60’ was found on the moon.

Iron-60 is not all that supernovae produce – they also produce cosmic rays, which are composed of high-energy electrons and atomic nuclei. Previous work by Neil Gehrels of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, was found to be incorrect as he indicated that a supernova would have to explode within 25 light-years of Earth to give our planet a radiation dose strong enough to cause a major mass extinction.

supernovae_science_of_cycles_ms

Now, a team led by Brian Thomas of Washburn University, and Adrian Melott of the University of Kansas argues that this conclusion is incorrect. The researchers looked at what would happen if a supernova exploded at a distance of 325 light-years and worked-out how its radiation would affect Earth. They found that cosmic rays accelerated towards Earth by the supernova are a different story. These have energies in the teraelectronvolt (TeV) region and are able to “pass right through the solar wind and Earth’s magnetic field and propagate much further into the atmosphere than cosmic rays normally do.”, says Melott.

When a cosmic ray strikes an air molecule, it produces a shower of secondary particles that is filled with the likes of protons, neutrons and a strong flux of muons. Ordinarily this takes place in the upper atmosphere and can be responsible for ionizing and destroying ozone in the stratosphere. However, the supernova cosmic rays are so energetic that they will pass straight through the stratosphere, lower atmosphere, and down to the surface and deep into the oceans and mantle.

muon4

Today, muons contribute a sixth of our annual radiation dose, however, the team calculated a supernova hit would result in a 20-fold increase in the muon flux that would triple the annual radiation dose of life forms on the planet.

_science-of-cycles24_m

Keep Science of Cycles Flourishing For All

* Be part of keeping ‘Science of Cycles’ alive and free. Your support is needed to keep this unique and valuable resource. Help sponsor us with your pledge as you see fit to the value you receive from our news service.

If above banner does not work – CLICK HERE

 

 

IMPORTANT ARTICLE: Greater Concern of Cosmic Rays Effect to Earth Then I Realized

As you will see from the following article, it is one of many describing findings from the latest research and studies related to galactic cosmic rays. What I find to be a bit perplexing, is the amount and method of delivery from the science community regarding cosmic rays. It would appear scientific data is coming in at record pace via the incredible spacecraft such as  HERSCHEL, PLANK, CHANDRA, and WISE, and researchers are hard pressed to disseminate their findings in published papers.

***Help SoC continue its research with your supportive donation (see bottom of article)

planck_wise_cassini_chandra

As related to my research on the Galaxy-Sun-Earth connection published in 2012, it appears to have hit almost every note presented, however, apparently I under estimated the foretelling possibilities galactic cosmic rays could have on Earth. There is quite a bit of data flowing out, much of which has to do with recent discoveries indicating supernovae explosions hitting Earth; and was the source of at least two ‘mass’ extinctions, and very likely the source of ‘partial’ extinctions.

New Equation:
Increase Charged Particles → Decreased Magnetic Field → Increase Outer Core Convection → Increase of Mantle Plumes → Increase in Earthquake and Volcanoes → Cools Mantle and Outer Core → Return of Outer Core Convection (Mitch Battros – July 2012)

_new_equation 2012

There is a great deal to present to you so this will be a 3 or 4 part article with this as Part-I. Below is one of the latest published findings showing the desire to, better and perhaps quickly, understand the pre and post eruptions, and most importantly, the rhythmic cycles.

STAY TUNED…………..

__________________

Keep Science of Cycles Flourishing For All

milky-way-g1.9+0.3

Astronomers have uncovered the strongest evidence yet exhibiting an enormous X-shaped structure made of stars that lies within the central bulge of the Milky Way Galaxy. Previous computer models showing observations of other galaxies – including our own galaxy Milky Way, suggesting the X-shaped structure does exist. However, no one had observed it directly, and some astronomers argued that previous research pointed indirectly to the existence of the X, but that it could be explained in other ways.

Lead author is Melissa Ness, researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, along with Dustin Lang, research associate at the University of Toronto’s Dunlap Institute for Astronomy & Astrophysics, and co-author of the paper describing the discovery. Lang says: “Controversy about whether the X-shaped structure existed, but our paper furnishes an authoritative composition of our own Milky Way’s galactic core. The results appear in the July issue of the Astronomical Journal.

galactic-alignment-X

The Milky Way Galaxy is a barred spiral galaxy; a disk-shaped collection of dust, gas and billions of stars, 100,000 light-years in diameter. It is far from a simple disk structure, being comprised of two spiral arms, a bar-shaped feature that runs through its center, and a central bulge of stars. The central bulge, like other barred galaxy’s bulges, resembles a rectangular box or peanut as viewed from within the plane of the galaxy. The X-shaped structure is an integral component of the bulge.

“The bulge is a key signature of formation of the Milky Way Galaxy,” says Ness. “If we understand the bulge we will understand the key processes which had formed and shaped our galaxy.”

“The shape of the bulge tells us about how it has formed. We see the X-shape and boxy morphology so clearly in the WISE image, demonstrating the internal formation processes have been the ones driving the bulge formation.”

Milky_Way_Galactic_Plane2

It is also evidence that our galaxy did not experience major merging events since the bulge formed. If it had, interactions with other galaxies would have disrupted its shape.

Keep Science of Cycles Flourishing For All

_science-of-cycles24_m

 *** Be part of keeping ‘Science of Cycles’ alive and free. Your support is needed to keep this unique and valuable resource. Help sponsor us with your pledge as you see fit to the value you receive from our news service.

If above banner does not work – CLICK HERE