On the program "Through the Wormhole" Morgan Freeman reported about a discovery that was made concerning a supposed relationship between the rate of decay of certain elements and solar flares. The observations indicated that just prior to the manifestation of a solar flare event the observed rate of decay of radioactive material dropped a measureable amount and that after the event passed the rate went back to normal. According to the laws of physics that is not supposed to happen. They didn't take the investigation any further and I can't find anything on the internet confirming or disproving the observation. So, was the observation flawed, or do the laws of physics need to change?
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Hmmm, good food for thought.

---

I found this.
http://phys.org/news/2014-10-textbook-knowledge-reconfirmed-radioactive-substances.html

Even sophisticated analyzing methods give no indication of seasonal variations. It can thus be assumed that an influence of solar neutrinos on the radioactive decay does not exist − at least not in the order of magnitude postulated.

That study was about whether seasonal variations in the distance between the earth and the sun affected the rate of radioactive decay which yielded negative results. So far I haven't seen anything that refutes the observations made during a solar flare event.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

That study was about whether seasonal variations in the distance between the earth and the sun affected the rate of radioactive decay which yielded negative results. So far I haven't seen anything that refutes the observations made during a solar flare event.

Actually that study is done by the Physikalisch-Technische-Bundesandstalt in Germany for the alpha decay of 226Ra, who brought Peter Sturrock the data that he interpret differently and now suggesting a new particle called the neutrello.

Variable radioactive decay rates and the changes in solar activity.
http://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rates-and-solar-activity

In later work, Fischbach, Jenkins, and Sturrock proposed the existence of a new particle called the neutrello, which in many respects is the same as the neutrino, but differs in its ability to interact with radionuclei.

Ok. The link is to a creationalist website so perhaps their view is all nonsense:)
Fischbach, Jenkins and Sturrock paper instead.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.1470.pdf