4.5 Review

The Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity over the Past 106-109 Years as Recorded by Cosmogenic Nuclides in Meteorites and Terrestrial Samples

期刊

SPACE SCIENCE REVIEWS
卷 176, 期 1-4, 页码 351-363

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11214-011-9769-9

关键词

Galactic cosmic ray intensity; Cosmogenic nuclides; Meteorites; Beryllium-10 in sediments; Exposure ages

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concentrations of stable and radioactive nuclides produced by cosmic ray particles in meteorites allow us to track the long term average of the primary flux of galactic cosmic rays (GCR). During the past similar to 10 Ma, the average GCR flux remained constant over timescales of hundreds of thousands to millions of years, and, if corrected for known variations in solar modulation, also during the past several years to hundreds of years. Because the cosmic ray concentrations in meteorites represent integral signals, it is difficult to assess the limits of uncertainty of this statement, but they are larger than the often quoted analytical and model uncertainties of some 30%. Time series of concentrations of the radionuclide Be-10 in terrestrial samples strengthen the conclusions drawn from meteorite studies, indicating that the GCR intensity on a similar to 0.5 million year scale has remained constant within some +/- 10% during the past similar to 10 million years. The very long-lived radioactive nuclide K-40 allows to assess the GCR flux over about the past one billion years. The flux over the past few million years has been the same as the longer-term average in the past 0.5-1 billion years within a factor of similar to 1.5. However, newer data do not confirm a long-held belief that the flux in the past few million years has been higher by some 30-50% than the very long term average. Neither does our analysis confirm a hypothesis that the iron meteorite data indicate a similar to 150 million year periodicity in the cosmic ray flux, possibly related to variations in the long-term terrestrial climate.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据