ICP-SFMS search for long-lived naturally-occurring heavy, superheavy and superactinide nuclei compared to AMS experiments

TL;DR

This paper discusses the conflicting results of heavy element detection in natural samples using ICP-SFMS and AMS, suggesting that previous negative results may be due to sampling issues and that observed signals could indicate long-lived superheavy nuclei.

Contribution

It proposes that differences in sampling methods explain discrepancies and suggests that signals attributed to artifacts might actually be evidence of long-lived superheavy elements.

Findings

AMS experiments found no heavy nuclei in unrefined ores.

ICP-SFMS detected heavy, superheavy, and superactinide nuclei in processed samples.

Results imply possible existence of long-lived superheavy isotopes in natural materials.

Abstract

Negative results obtained in AMS searches by Dellinger et al. on mostly unrefined ores have led them to conclude that the very heavy long-lived species found in chemically processed samples with ICP-SFMS by Marinov et al. are artifacts. We argue that it may not be surprising that results obtained from small random samplings of inhomogeneous natural minerals would contrast with concentrations found in homogeneous materials extracted from large quantities of ore. We also point out that it is possible that the groups of counts at masses 296 and 294 seen by Dellinger et al. could be, within experimental uncertainties, due to $^{296}$Rg and $^{294}$eka-Bi in long-lived isomeric states. In such case, the experiments of Dellinger et al. lend support to the experiments of Marinov et al.