新数据未能复制公元二千年早期的小范围放射性碳异常现象

IF 2 3区 地球科学 Q2 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS
Radiocarbon Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1017/rdc.2024.52
A Scifo, T Abi Nassif, M Conti, A Bayliss, P Doeve, M W Dee
{"title":"新数据未能复制公元二千年早期的小范围放射性碳异常现象","authors":"A Scifo, T Abi Nassif, M Conti, A Bayliss, P Doeve, M W Dee","doi":"10.1017/rdc.2024.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade, the field of radiocarbon analysis has been revolutionized by the discovery of single-year anomalies, because they can be used as markers of space weather events and as time anchors for exact dating. Brehm et al. (2021) recently analyzed two new anomalies, in the years 1052 CE and 1279 CE. These candidates show consecutive year Δ<jats:sup>14</jats:sup>C increases of 5.9‰ and 6.5‰, respectively. In this study, we measured and analyzed dendrochronologically dated oak wood samples from northern Europe spanning both these years. Our results, although statistically consistent with those presented in the original publication, show effectively no increase in Δ<jats:sup>14</jats:sup>C (1 and 2.5 times the measurement error, respectively). Nonetheless, we proceed to analyze our datasets with the aid of the open-source Python package <jats:monospace>ticktack</jats:monospace>. Our modeled outputs confirm that radiocarbon production barely rose above background levels across these two periods, and no event of clearly resolvable start date or duration could be detected. Additionally, we conduct the same analyses on a new sample spanning the years 531–550 CE. Here, once again, only weak evidence was obtained for any increase in radiocarbon production, and no significant annual rise was evident. The gradual increases exhibited by all three of these samples, and the ubiquity of these patterns across the calibration curve, call into question any likely cosmic event in these cases, and illustrate how challenging it will be to distinguish lower magnitude events in the radiocarbon record.","PeriodicalId":21020,"journal":{"name":"Radiocarbon","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New data fails to replicate the small-scale radiocarbon anomalies in the early second millennium CE\",\"authors\":\"A Scifo, T Abi Nassif, M Conti, A Bayliss, P Doeve, M W Dee\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/rdc.2024.52\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the last decade, the field of radiocarbon analysis has been revolutionized by the discovery of single-year anomalies, because they can be used as markers of space weather events and as time anchors for exact dating. Brehm et al. (2021) recently analyzed two new anomalies, in the years 1052 CE and 1279 CE. These candidates show consecutive year Δ<jats:sup>14</jats:sup>C increases of 5.9‰ and 6.5‰, respectively. In this study, we measured and analyzed dendrochronologically dated oak wood samples from northern Europe spanning both these years. Our results, although statistically consistent with those presented in the original publication, show effectively no increase in Δ<jats:sup>14</jats:sup>C (1 and 2.5 times the measurement error, respectively). Nonetheless, we proceed to analyze our datasets with the aid of the open-source Python package <jats:monospace>ticktack</jats:monospace>. Our modeled outputs confirm that radiocarbon production barely rose above background levels across these two periods, and no event of clearly resolvable start date or duration could be detected. Additionally, we conduct the same analyses on a new sample spanning the years 531–550 CE. Here, once again, only weak evidence was obtained for any increase in radiocarbon production, and no significant annual rise was evident. The gradual increases exhibited by all three of these samples, and the ubiquity of these patterns across the calibration curve, call into question any likely cosmic event in these cases, and illustrate how challenging it will be to distinguish lower magnitude events in the radiocarbon record.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiocarbon\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiocarbon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/rdc.2024.52\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiocarbon","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rdc.2024.52","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的十年中,单年异常的发现给放射性碳分析领域带来了革命性的变化,因为它们既可以作为空间天气事件的标记,也可以作为精确年代测定的时间锚。Brehm 等人(2021 年)最近分析了西元 1052 年和西元 1279 年的两个新的异常点。这两个候选异常显示Δ14C 分别连续上升了 5.9‰和 6.5‰。在这项研究中,我们测量并分析了北欧跨越这两个年代的橡木样本的年代学数据。尽管我们的结果在统计上与原始出版物中的结果一致,但实际上Δ14C 并没有增加(分别是测量误差的 1 倍和 2.5 倍)。尽管如此,我们还是借助开源 Python 软件包 ticktack 对数据集进行了分析。我们的模型输出结果证实,在这两个时期,放射性碳的生成量几乎没有超过背景水平,也没有检测到明确的开始日期或持续时间。此外,我们还对西元 531-550 年的新样本进行了同样的分析。在这里,我们再次只得到了放射性碳生成量增加的微弱证据,而且没有明显的年增长率。这三个样本都表现出了逐渐增加的现象,而且这些现象在整个校准曲线中无处不在,这让我们对这些样本中可能存在的宇宙事件产生了怀疑,同时也说明了在放射性碳记录中区分较低量级的事件是多么具有挑战性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New data fails to replicate the small-scale radiocarbon anomalies in the early second millennium CE
Over the last decade, the field of radiocarbon analysis has been revolutionized by the discovery of single-year anomalies, because they can be used as markers of space weather events and as time anchors for exact dating. Brehm et al. (2021) recently analyzed two new anomalies, in the years 1052 CE and 1279 CE. These candidates show consecutive year Δ14C increases of 5.9‰ and 6.5‰, respectively. In this study, we measured and analyzed dendrochronologically dated oak wood samples from northern Europe spanning both these years. Our results, although statistically consistent with those presented in the original publication, show effectively no increase in Δ14C (1 and 2.5 times the measurement error, respectively). Nonetheless, we proceed to analyze our datasets with the aid of the open-source Python package ticktack. Our modeled outputs confirm that radiocarbon production barely rose above background levels across these two periods, and no event of clearly resolvable start date or duration could be detected. Additionally, we conduct the same analyses on a new sample spanning the years 531–550 CE. Here, once again, only weak evidence was obtained for any increase in radiocarbon production, and no significant annual rise was evident. The gradual increases exhibited by all three of these samples, and the ubiquity of these patterns across the calibration curve, call into question any likely cosmic event in these cases, and illustrate how challenging it will be to distinguish lower magnitude events in the radiocarbon record.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Radiocarbon
Radiocarbon 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
6.00%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Radiocarbon serves as the leading international journal for technical and interpretive articles, date lists, and advancements in 14C and other radioisotopes relevant to archaeological, geophysical, oceanographic, and related dating methods. Established in 1959, it has published numerous seminal works and hosts the triennial International Radiocarbon Conference proceedings. The journal also features occasional special issues. Submissions encompass regular articles such as research reports, technical descriptions, and date lists, along with comments, letters to the editor, book reviews, and laboratory lists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信