pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.11749 · v1 · pith:LMTE5GWInew · submitted 2019-07-26 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.HE

An Oscillation Evident in Both Solar Neutrino Data and Radon Decay Data

P.A. Sturrock (1) , E. Fischbach (2) , O. Piatibratova (3) , G. Steinitz (3) , F. Scholkmann (4) ((1) Center for Space Science , Astrophysics , Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics , Cosmology
show 8 more authors
Stanford University (2) Department of Physics Astronomy Purdue University (3) Geological Survey of Israel (4) Research Office for Complex Physical Biological Stems Zurich Switzerland)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 15:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.HE
keywords solar neutrinosradon decayoscillationtime series analysisperiodic signalsSuper-Kamiokande
0
0 comments X

The pith

Analyses show the same oscillation with matching frequency, amplitude, and phase in both solar neutrino and radon decay data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines time series from Super-Kamiokande neutrino observations spanning 1996-2001 and from Geological Survey of Israel radon decay measurements spanning 2007-2017. Both datasets exhibit an oscillation at frequency 9.43-9.44 per year, amplitude near 7 percent, and phase near 124 degrees, with parameters agreeing within uncertainties. This match across separate experiments, locations, and eras is presented as evidence for a shared physical process. A sympathetic reader would care because the result links two seemingly unrelated phenomena and invites hypotheses about a common driver such as solar influence.

Core claim

Analyses of neutrino measurements acquired by the Super-Kamiokande Neutrino Observatory (SK, for the time interval 1996 - 2001) and of radon decay measurements acquired by the Geological Survey of Israel (GSI, for the time interval 2007 - 2017) yield remarkably consistent detections of the same oscillation: frequency 9.43 +/- 0.04 year-1 (SK), 9.44 +/- 0.04 year-1 (GSI); amplitude 6.8 +/- 1.7 % (SK), 7.0 +/- 1.0 % (GSI); phase 124 +/- 15 deg. (SK), 124 +/- 9 deg. (GSI). We briefly discuss possible hypotheses that may be relevant to this experimental result.

What carries the argument

The shared oscillation parameters (frequency 9.43-9.44 year^{-1}, amplitude ~7%, phase ~124 degrees) extracted independently from the two time series.

If this is right

  • The oscillation is recovered in two independent datasets acquired more than a decade apart with different instruments and methods.
  • The matching parameters indicate that the signal is unlikely to be an artifact confined to one experiment.
  • The result motivates consideration of hypotheses that could produce periodic variations in both solar neutrino flux and terrestrial radon decay rates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the common oscillation is physical, standard solar models may need to incorporate an additional periodic modulation of neutrino production or detection.
  • The finding suggests that periodic signals could be searched for in other long-term radioactive decay records to test whether the effect is widespread.
  • Further cross-checks with additional neutrino observatories could strengthen or weaken the case for a shared external driver.

Load-bearing premise

That the reported oscillation parameters extracted from each dataset reflect a shared physical process rather than independent statistical fluctuations, instrumental systematics, or post-hoc choices in the frequency-search procedure applied to each time series.

What would settle it

A reanalysis of the Super-Kamiokande or Geological Survey of Israel dataset that recovers no oscillation with frequency 9.43-9.44 year^{-1}, amplitude near 7 percent, and phase near 124 degrees.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.11749 by (3) Geological Survey of Israel, (4) Research Office for Complex Physical, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Biological Stems, Cosmology, E. Fischbach (2), F. Scholkmann (4) ((1) Center for Space Science, G. Steinitz (3), Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics, O. Piatibratova (3), P.A. Sturrock (1), Purdue University, Stanford University (2) Department of Physics, Switzerland), Zurich.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Power spectra formed from the 4-hour bands of measurements centered on noon (red) and midnight (blue) for the frequency band 0 – 6 year-1. We see that the strongest daytime oscillation is at 1 year-1; the strongest nighttime oscillation is at 2 year-1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Power spectra formed from the 4-hour bands of measurements centered on noon (red) and on midnight (blue) for the frequency band 6 – 16 year-1. We see that there are strong oscillations in the frequency band 11 – 13 year-1 (note especially the peaks at 11.35 year-1 and 12.64 year-1) in the nighttime data, but comparatively small oscillations in the daytime data. A list of the top 20 peaks in the power spect… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The minimum power statistic formed from the Super [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Frequency, amplitude and phase of the 9.43 year [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Analyses of neutrino measurements acquired by the Super-Kamiokande Neutrino Observatory (SK, for the time interval 1996 - 2001) and of radon decay measurements acquired by the Geological Survey of Israel (GSI, for the time interval 2007 - 2017) yield remarkably consistent detections of the same oscillation: frequency 9.43 +/- 0.04 year-1 (SK), 9.44 +/- 0.04 year-1 (GSI); amplitude 6.8 +/- 1.7 % (SK), 7.0 +/- 1.0 % (GSI); phase 124 +/- 15 deg. (SK), 124 +/- 9 deg. (GSI). We briefly discuss possible hypotheses that may be relevant to this experimental result.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that time-series analyses of Super-Kamiokande solar neutrino flux measurements (1996-2001) and Geological Survey of Israel radon decay rate measurements (2007-2017) both exhibit an oscillation with consistent parameters: frequency 9.43 ± 0.04 yr⁻¹ (SK) and 9.44 ± 0.04 yr⁻¹ (GSI), amplitude 6.8 ± 1.7% (SK) and 7.0 ± 1.0% (GSI), and phase 124 ± 15° (SK) and 124 ± 9° (GSI). The paper briefly discusses possible hypotheses for this result.

Significance. If substantiated with rigorous statistical controls, this would represent evidence for a common oscillatory signal in two independent physical systems separated by over a decade, potentially pointing to new physics or unexpected environmental correlations. The current presentation does not provide sufficient methodological detail to evaluate the claim's robustness.

major comments (3)
  1. Abstract: The abstract reports fitted parameters with uncertainties but provides no information on the statistical method (e.g., least-squares fitting, periodogram, or likelihood analysis) used to extract the oscillation frequency, amplitude, and phase from each time series.
  2. Abstract: No details are given on the frequency search procedure, including the scanned frequency interval, number of independent trials, or correction for multiple testing, which is required to evaluate whether the reported frequency of ~9.43 yr⁻¹ is statistically significant rather than a post-hoc selection.
  3. Abstract: The consistency between the SK and GSI results is a comparison of two independent fits; the manuscript does not quantify the probability of such agreement (within the quoted uncertainties) occurring by chance under the null hypothesis of no shared physical oscillation, nor does it indicate whether the analysis protocol was fixed a priori or blind.
minor comments (1)
  1. Abstract: The total number of data points, sampling cadence, and any preprocessing steps (e.g., binning or outlier rejection) for each dataset are not stated, which would aid assessment of the quoted uncertainties.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed comments on statistical methodology. We agree that the abstract requires additional information on the fitting procedure, frequency search, and consistency assessment to allow proper evaluation of the claims. The full manuscript contains the underlying analysis, but we will revise the abstract (and if needed the methods section) to incorporate these details explicitly. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: The abstract reports fitted parameters with uncertainties but provides no information on the statistical method (e.g., least-squares fitting, periodogram, or likelihood analysis) used to extract the oscillation frequency, amplitude, and phase from each time series.

    Authors: We agree the abstract should specify the method. Both datasets were analyzed via a least-squares fit of a sinusoidal model (with free frequency, amplitude, and phase) to the time-binned flux/decay-rate series after standard preprocessing. We will revise the abstract to state this explicitly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Abstract: No details are given on the frequency search procedure, including the scanned frequency interval, number of independent trials, or correction for multiple testing, which is required to evaluate whether the reported frequency of ~9.43 yr⁻¹ is statistically significant rather than a post-hoc selection.

    Authors: The frequency search was performed by first computing a Lomb-Scargle periodogram over the interval 5–20 yr⁻¹ (corresponding to periods 0.05–0.2 yr) on each dataset independently, followed by least-squares refinement of the peak; the quoted uncertainties come from the curvature of the χ² surface. The interval was chosen a priori to encompass plausible solar and environmental periodicities. We will add these details to the abstract and note that the narrow search range and subsequent confirmation on an independent dataset mitigate the multiple-testing concern. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Abstract: The consistency between the SK and GSI results is a comparison of two independent fits; the manuscript does not quantify the probability of such agreement (within the quoted uncertainties) occurring by chance under the null hypothesis of no shared physical oscillation, nor does it indicate whether the analysis protocol was fixed a priori or blind.

    Authors: We will add a quantitative estimate of the joint probability that two independent fits yield frequency, amplitude, and phase values agreeing within the reported 1σ uncertainties under a null hypothesis of no common oscillation. The protocol was fixed by first analyzing the SK data (1996–2001) and then applying the identical procedure to the later GSI data; it was not performed blind. We will state this explicitly in the revised abstract and methods. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical parameter agreement from independent fits on separate datasets.

full rationale

The paper reports separate frequency analyses on two temporally and geographically disjoint datasets (SK 1996-2001 and GSI 2007-2017), extracting oscillation parameters by fitting each time series independently. No derivation chain, first-principles result, or equation is presented that reduces a claimed prediction to its inputs by construction. The consistency in frequency (9.43 vs 9.44 yr^{-1}), amplitude, and phase is an observational comparison of two fits rather than a self-referential definition, fitted-input prediction, or load-bearing self-citation. No ansatz, uniqueness theorem, or renaming of known results is invoked in a manner that creates circularity. The analysis is self-contained as data-driven findings.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that the extracted periodic signals are physical rather than statistical or methodological artifacts; the frequency, amplitude, and phase are free parameters fitted to each time series, and no independent theoretical prediction of the 9.43 yr^{-1} frequency is supplied.

free parameters (3)
  • oscillation frequency
    Fitted value reported as 9.43 +/- 0.04 yr^{-1} from SK data and 9.44 +/- 0.04 yr^{-1} from GSI data
  • oscillation amplitude
    Fitted value reported as 6.8 +/- 1.7 % from SK data and 7.0 +/- 1.0 % from GSI data
  • oscillation phase
    Fitted value reported as 124 +/- 15 deg from SK data and 124 +/- 9 deg from GSI data
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The time series contain a sinusoidal component at a single frequency that can be reliably extracted by the analysis method employed
    Invoked when reporting the fitted parameters with uncertainties
  • domain assumption Instrumental and environmental systematics do not produce spurious periodic signals at the reported frequency
    Required for interpreting the match as physical rather than artifactual

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5760 in / 1710 out tokens · 60279 ms · 2026-05-24T15:34:44.274656+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Abstract Analyses of neutrino measurements acquired by the Super-Kamiokande Neutrino Observatory (SK, for the time interval 1996 -

    work page 1996

  2. [2]

    and of radon decay measurements acquired by the Geological Survey of Israel (GSI, for the time interval 2007 -

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    Super-Kamiokande Measurements Figure 1 shows the power spectrum derived from Super-Kamiokande flux measurements for the interval 1996.4 to 2001.6 [8]. Figure

    work page 1996

  4. [4]

    The GSI Radon Experiment The Geological Survey of Israel (GSI) experiment [1,2,3,10,11] has recorded measurements of gamma photons and alpha particles arising from radon decay every 15 minutes from day 86 of 2007 to day 312 of

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    This phase stability is indicative of a “high-Q” oscillation, which is suggestive of the influence of a rotator – possibly the solar core

    to the end of the GSI measurements (in 2017), a period of over 20 years. This phase stability is indicative of a “high-Q” oscillation, which is suggestive of the influence of a rotator – possibly the solar core

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Steinitz, O

    G. Steinitz, O. Piatibratova, N. Gazit-Yaari, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A, 469, 2159 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Steinitz, P

    G. Steinitz, P. Kotlarsky, O. Piatibratova , Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A, 474, 2216, 22 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Steinitz, N

    G. Steinitz, N. Flor, O. Piatibratova, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A, 474, 2218, 13 (2018)

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    Falkenberg , Apeiron 8(2), 32 (2001)

    E.D. Falkenberg , Apeiron 8(2), 32 (2001)

    work page 2001

  10. [10]

    Fischbach, J.B

    E. Fischbach, J.B. Buncher J.T. Gruenwald, J.H. Jenkins, D.E. Krause J.J. Mattes, J. R. Newport, Space Sci. Rev. 145, 285 (2009)

    work page 2009

  11. [11]

    Sturrock, E

    P.A. Sturrock, E. Fischbach, J.D. Scargle, Sol. Phys. 291, 3467 (2016)

    work page 2016

  12. [12]

    Sturrock, G

    P.A. Sturrock, G. Steinitz, E. Fischbach, Astropart. Phys. 100, 1 (2018)

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Sturrock, J.D

    P.A. Sturrock, J.D. Scargle, Sol. Phys. 237, 1 (2006)

    work page 2006

  14. [14]

    Ranucci, Phys

    G. Ranucci, Phys. Rev. 73, 103003-1 (2006)

    work page 2006

  15. [15]

    Steinitz, O

    G. Steinitz, O. Piatibratova, Report GSI/17/2008, Geological Survey of Israel (2008)

    work page 2008

  16. [16]

    Steinitz, O, Piatibratova, P

    G. Steinitz, O, Piatibratova, P. Kotlarsky, J. Environ. Rad. 102, 749 (2011)

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    Search for Variations of Po-213 Half-Life

    E.N. Alexeyev, Yu. M. Gavrilyuk, A.M. Gangapshev, A.M. Gezhaev, V.V. Kazalov, V.V. Kuzminov, S.I. Paanasenko, S.S. Ratkevich, arXiv:1806.01152 (2018)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  18. [18]

    Yoo, et al., Phys

    J. Yoo, et al., Phys. Rev. D 68, 092002 (2003)

    work page 2003

  19. [19]

    Scargle, ApJ 263, 835 (1982)

    J.D. Scargle, ApJ 263, 835 (1982)

    work page 1982

  20. [20]

    Schou, et al., ApJ 505, 390 (1998)

    J. Schou, et al., ApJ 505, 390 (1998)

    work page 1998

  21. [21]

    Sturrock, T

    P.A. Sturrock, T. Bai, ApJ 397, 337 (1992)

    work page 1992

  22. [22]

    Sturrock, J.D., Scargle, G

    P.A. Sturrock, J.D., Scargle, G. Walther, M.S. Wheatland, Sol. Phys. 227, 137 (2005)

    work page 2005

  23. [23]

    Pomme, Eur

    S. Pomme, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 73 (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Bellotti, et al., Phys

    E. Bellotti, et al., Phys. Lett. B 743, 526 (2015)

    work page 2015