- #1
Norman
- 897
- 4
Hi all,
I am a particle physicist who deals with transport of radiation through materials. That is to say I am directly involved with the shielding of astronauts from galactic cosmic rays. I came across a paper a paper that said the http://www.gsajournals.org/gsaonline/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1130%2F1052-5173(2003)013%3C0004:CDOPC%3E2.0.CO%3B2[".
It is a paper by Veizer and Shaviv that looks at geological records and compares them to some models of the GCR spectrum.
My question is, is this considered main stream science? That is to say, has there been any work that refutes this or superceedes it? Has a consensus in the atmospheric and geological realms been reached on the validity of their statements? Admittedly, I have not read the paper in detail, just a quick skim. I will withold any more comments until the people who are more knowledgeable than me in this realm comment.
Cheers,
Ryan
I am a particle physicist who deals with transport of radiation through materials. That is to say I am directly involved with the shielding of astronauts from galactic cosmic rays. I came across a paper a paper that said the http://www.gsajournals.org/gsaonline/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1130%2F1052-5173(2003)013%3C0004:CDOPC%3E2.0.CO%3B2[".
It is a paper by Veizer and Shaviv that looks at geological records and compares them to some models of the GCR spectrum.
My question is, is this considered main stream science? That is to say, has there been any work that refutes this or superceedes it? Has a consensus in the atmospheric and geological realms been reached on the validity of their statements? Admittedly, I have not read the paper in detail, just a quick skim. I will withold any more comments until the people who are more knowledgeable than me in this realm comment.
Cheers,
Ryan
Last edited by a moderator: