Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Natural superheavy nuclei in astrophysical data

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Fossil tracks in meteoritic olivine record natural superheavy nuclei near element 119.

desk verdict A large, credible track database update from the OLIMPIYA program, but the paper's headline claim of three natural superheavy nuclei at Z≈119 still rests on an unvalidated straight-line extrapolation of the calibration curve beyond Z=92. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02931 v1 pith:U4KRXAGN submitted 2019-08-08 nucl-ex astro-ph.HE

classification nucl-exastro-ph.HE
keywords superheavynucleigalacticcosmicraysolivinetrackdetectorsmeteoritesislandofstabilityr-processnucleosynthesisneutronstarmergerschargecalibration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Fossil tracks in olivine crystals from two meteorites are presented as the largest existing record of heavy cosmic-ray nuclei, with 21,743 tracks in the charge range $Z=26$ to $Z=129$. The paper claims that three of those tracks have etching rates too high for uranium and correspond to transfermium nuclei — elements beyond fermium at atomic number 100 — with estimated charges around $119^{+10}_{-6}$, which would be the first direct evidence that naturally occurring superheavy nuclei from the predicted 'island of stability' exist. It also reports that the meteorite with the longer cosmic-ray exposure shows a higher relative abundance of the heaviest nuclei, a difference the authors interpret as the 'smoking gun' that these nuclei are produced in rare neutron-star-merger events. The significance, if the interpretation holds, is that the periodic table's heaviest region is populated in nature and can be sampled by long-lived natural detectors rather than only by accelerators.

What carries the argument

The central object is the chemically etched nuclear track in olivine, a natural detector with an energy-loss threshold of about 18 MeV/(mg·cm²) that suppresses tracks from nuclei lighter than iron. The method repeatedly polishes a crystal surface, etches it, and measures each track's etching rate $V$ and residual path length $L$; the empirical function $V(L,Z)$, calibrated with accelerator beams up to $Z=92$ and supported by a numerical etching model, converts those measurements into nuclear charges. For the three superheavy candidates the calibration is a straight line fitted to five experimental points up to $Z=92$ and extrapolated to the measured etching rate of 35 µm/h, and this extrapolation is what produces the charge estimate near 119.

What would settle it

Irradiating olivine crystals with accelerator ions of known charges above 92 and measuring the etching rate near the stopping point would settle the extrapolation: calibration points that depart from the straight line, or a measured rate that cannot reach 35 µm/h for any stable charge, would remove the basis for identifying the three tracks as transfermium nuclei.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the survey's three longest, fastest-etching tracks cannot be made by any known nucleus below uranium and therefore record natural superheavy nuclei with charges in the range 113 to 129, with a nominal estimate of $119^{+10}_{-6}$. The measured etching rate of these tracks, greater than 35 µm/h near the stopping point, is compared with the maximum rate of $26\pm1$ µm/h measured for uranium tracks, and the charge estimate comes from extrapolating the calibration of etching rate versus charge along a straight line through five experimental points up to $Z=92$. The authors also claim that a comparison of the two meteorites' charge spectra shows that the older meteorite is richer in transuranium nuclei, which they take as evidence of rare r-process events such as neutron-star mergers contributing a distinct component to the cosmic-ray flux. If correct, this would be direct experimental evidence that the island of stability exists in nature.

Load-bearing premise

The three superheavy-charge assignments rest on a straight-line extrapolation of the etching-rate-versus-charge calibration from five points up to $Z=92$ out to an etching rate of 35 µm/h; if the true calibration curve bends or saturates beyond uranium, the inferred charges near 119 are unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the three tracks are what the paper claims, naturally occurring superheavy nuclei exist in galactic cosmic rays and must be stable enough to survive transport from their source to the meteorite over tens of millions of years.
  • The higher transuranium abundance in the older meteorite becomes a direct, age-dependent signature of rare neutron-star-merger r-process events, not an artifact of detector response.
  • The 21,743-track charge spectrum can serve as a long-exposure reference that satellite and balloon experiments, which see only current fluxes, cannot provide.
  • A confirmed charge near 119 would extend the known natural elements across the island of stability and imply that elements 119 and 120, never made in the laboratory, may be recoverable in nature.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A nonlinear re-analysis of the same three tracks using plausible saturation models for the etching-rate-versus-charge curve could quantify how much of the 'superheavy' conclusion survives if the straight-line calibration is wrong; even a charge dropping to roughly $Z=110$ would still be trans-uranium and astrophysically notable.
  • If the meteorite-age difference is truly a smoking gun, the abundance ratio between meteorites of different exposure ages could be inverted to estimate the local rate of neutron-star mergers within the few kiloparsecs that contribute to the ultraheavy cosmic-ray flux.
  • The claimed detection implies that superheavy nuclei synthesized in an r-process must have half-lives of at least millions of years, which would make them candidates for searches in other long-integration natural samples such as lunar regolith and deep-sea crusts.
  • A direct confirmation could come from searching for correlated decay signatures—spontaneous fission tracks or characteristic X-rays—emanating from the terminal points of the three long tracks in the same crystals.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript summarises the OLIMPIYA search for heavy and superheavy galactic cosmic-ray nuclei in olivine crystals from the Marjalahti and Eagle Station pallasites. It reports 21,743 etched tracks with Z>26, compares charge abundances with satellite data (Ariel-6, HEAO-3, UHCRE) and between the two meteorites, and interprets the difference as evidence for a neutron-star-merger origin. The headline result is the identification of three tracks with charges estimated as 119+10−6, presented as direct evidence for naturally occurring long-lived superheavy nuclei from the predicted island of stability.

Significance. The experimental effort is substantial: the OLIMPIYA database is by far the largest of its kind, and the comparison between meteorites with different exposure ages is a sensible way to test rare, burst-like sources. If the charge assignments were sound, the three-track result would be a discovery of the highest importance. As presented, however, the central identification rests on a single unvalidated extrapolation, so the significance claim is not yet justified. The abundance-ratio comparisons in Table 1 are useful only to the extent the charge calibration is reliable, which is not established for Z>92.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3] The charges of the three superheavy tracks depend entirely on the statement that 'the dependence of the etching rate on the charge was approximated by a straight line along the available five experimental points up to the value of Z=92' and then extrapolated to 35 µm/h, giving Z≈119. This is a long extrapolation beyond the last calibrated point, with no physical model for V(Z) above Z=92, no uncertainty on the measured 35 µm/h, no propagation of the calibration-point scatter, and no discussion of possible saturation or bending of V(Z). Because 'transfermium' is defined by Z≥100, even a modest deviation of the true curve from the straight line would invalidate the charge assignment. The quoted '95% probability' cannot be assessed without the regression details and should not be interpreted as including extrapolation uncertainty until such an uncertainty is provided.
  2. [Abstract and Section 3] The abstract claims the three superheavy tracks have 'lifetimes of about a few decades', but no lifetime measurement is presented anywhere in the paper. A track etch-rate measurement integrated over a meteorite exposure of 35–205 Myr cannot determine a decades-scale decay lifetime; there is no time dependence, decay curve, or parent-daughter information. This claim should be removed unless a separate analysis supports it.
  3. [Section 3] The assignment 'charges estimated as 119+10−6' is quoted without derivation. The text gives no regression formula, no residual scatter around the fitted straight line, no per-track measurements of V or L, and no systematic error budget. The error bars are therefore unexplained, and the claim that the three tracks are 'transfermium' depends on an unsupported central value. A detailed account of the calibration fit, including the five points, the fit parameters, and the covariance, is required before this identification can be evaluated.
  4. [Section 2 versus Section 3] Section 2 says that the V(L,Z) dependence was fitted by a five-parameter function 'allowing for its extrapolation to larger Z values', while Section 3 says a straight line through five points up to Z=92 was extrapolated. These are different calibration procedures, and the manuscript does not state which one was used for the three tracks. This must be reconciled; if the straight-line procedure is the operative one, the five-parameter fit is irrelevant to the headline result, and if the five-parameter fit was used, its functional form and extrapolation uncertainties must be given.
minor comments (4)
  1. [References] Reference [15] lists 'arXiv:0911.300', which is an incomplete identifier; it should be the full arXiv number.
  2. [Section 3] The text describing neutron densities says '1019 cm3' and should be '10^19 cm^-3' for consistency with the units used later in the same sentence.
  3. [Abstract and Section 3] The phrase 'stable superheavy nuclei' is stronger than what the data can support; without a direct stability measurement the wording should be limited to 'long-lived' or 'long-lived radioactive'.
  4. [Figures 3 and 4] Figure 4 and Table 1 compare abundances between meteorites, but the figures omit error bars even though the capion text says they are omitted for clarity; given that the central argument is a difference in abundances, the figures should display the statistical (and ideally systematic) uncertainties.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central charge identification is an extrapolation from independent accelerator calibration, not a reduction to the paper's own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's core result—three tracks with charges estimated as 119+10−6—is derived from measured etching rates V>35 µm/h, compared with a V(Z) calibration obtained from accelerator irradiations of olivine at IMP and GSI [30] and from a numerical model of track formation [32]. Those calibration inputs are external to the target claim: they do not contain the three tracks or the superheavy conclusion. The charge estimate uses a straight-line extrapolation of five calibration points up to Z=92 to the measured rate of 35 µm/h; while this is an extrapolation with no quoted systematic uncertainty and is a serious correctness risk, it is not circular because the prediction is not defined in terms of the result and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The NSM-origin discussion cites an external model [33] that itself used OLIMPIYA data, so it is not strong independent confirmation, but the transfermium identification and meteorite abundance comparisons stand apart from that interpretive loop. Self-citations ([26], [30], [32]) supply calibration and prior statistics, but the underlying accelerator data and track-formation model are independent inputs; no equation in the paper reduces to its own output.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim does not introduce new physical entities; it interprets existing tracks as known but rare superheavy nuclei. The free parameters are the calibration fits that enable charge assignment, and the stated axioms are standard domain assumptions about the detector response, exposure ages, and island-of-stability theory.

free parameters (2)
  • V(L,Z) calibration curve fit (five-parameter function) = Not quoted in this paper; parameters are from Alexeev et al. 2016.
    The etching-rate versus charge dependence for 67<Z<92 was fitted in prior work [26], and this functional form is extrapolated to assign charges above Z=92. The shape of this curve directly determines the inferred Z for the three tracks.
  • Straight-line fit of V(Z) near the stopping point = Not quoted; fitted to five calibration points up to Z=92.
    Section 3 describes approximating the dependence of etching rate on charge by a straight line through five points up to Z=92 and extrapolating to V=35 micrometers per hour, which yields the estimated charge of 119. The slope and intercept are free parameters in this charge assessment.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Etching rate V is a monotonic, smoothly extrapolable function of nuclear charge Z up to Z about 119
    Needed for the straight-line extrapolation from Z=92 to Z=119 in Section 3; no data beyond Z=92 are shown in this paper.
  • domain assumption The response of olivine to accelerator ions is identical to its response to GCR nuclei
    Calibration relies on irradiations at IMP and GSI [30]; this transferability is assumed without explicit validation in this manuscript.
  • domain assumption Cosmic-ray exposure ages of 35-71 Myr (Eagle Station) and 178-205 Myr (Marjalahti) are accurate
    The two-meteorite comparison and the NSM 'smoking gun' interpretation depend on these ages, cited from [46].
  • domain assumption Island-of-stability theory permits nuclei with lifetimes long enough to reach the meteorites
    The interpretation of the three tracks as island-of-stability nuclei relies on theoretical half-life estimates [1,5], though the specific 'few decades' lifetime in the abstract is not derived.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Natural superheavy nuclei in astrophysical data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4KRXAGN

@misc{pith2026190802931,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Natural superheavy nuclei in astrophysical data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4KRXAGN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02931}
}
read the original abstract

The paper presents the summary data of the authors' research within the framework of the OLIMPIYA project (the Russian acronym of {\bf OLI}viny iz {\bf M}eteoritov --- {\bf P}oisk tyazholykh {\bf I} sverkhtyazholykh {\bf YA}der / Olivines from meteorites: Search for heavy and superheavy nuclei) and results of track analysis for heavy cosmic ray nuclei (\emph{Z} = 26--129) in olivine crystals from meteorites using an original processing technique. A total of 21,743 tracks of nuclei heavier than iron have been identified in meteoritic matter to date to form the largest database within this charge range. The database includes three tracks of superheavy nuclei with the lifetimes of about a few decades, which can be considered as direct experimental evidence for the existence of natural superheavy nuclei from the "island of stability". Comprehensive comparative analysis of data from two meteorites with different cosmic ray exposure ages, Marjalahti (from 178 to 205 Myr) and Eagle Station (from 35 to 71 Myr), is presented for the first time. The results are discussed within the existing concepts of nuclei formation in astrophysical processes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nilsson, S.G

    S.G. Nilsson, S.G. Thompson and C.F. Tsang,Stability of superheavy nuclei and their possible occurrence in nature, Phys. Lett. B 28 (1969) 458

  2. [2]

    Goeppert Mayer,The shell model, Science 145 (1964) 999

    M. Goeppert Mayer,The shell model, Science 145 (1964) 999

  3. [3]

    Mosel and W.Greiner,On the stability of superheavy nuclei against fission, Z

    U. Mosel and W.Greiner,On the stability of superheavy nuclei against fission, Z. Phys.A 222 (1969) 261. – 8 –

  4. [4]

    island of stability

    D. Ackermann and Ch. Theisen,Nuclear structure features of very heavy and superheavy nuclei-tracing quantum mechanics towards the “island of stability”, Phys. Scr. 92 (2017) 083002

  5. [5]

    Oganessian, A

    Yu.Ts. Oganessian, A. Sobiczewski and G.M. Ter-Akopian,Superheavy nuclei: from predictions to discovery, Phys. Scr. 92 (2017) 023003

  6. [6]

    Utyonkov et al.,The discovery of elements 113 to 118, EPJ Web of Conferences131 (2016) 06003

    V. Utyonkov et al.,The discovery of elements 113 to 118, EPJ Web of Conferences131 (2016) 06003

  7. [7]

    Seaborg and W.D

    G.T. Seaborg and W.D. Loveland,Elements beyond Uranium, John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York (1990)

  8. [8]

    https: //iupac.org/iupac-announces-the-names-of-the-elements-113-115-117-and-118/

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Haba,A new period in superheavy-element hunting, Nature Chem

    H. Haba,A new period in superheavy-element hunting, Nature Chem. 11 (2019) 10

  2. [10]

    Oganessian and V.K

    Yu.Ts. Oganessian and V.K. Utyonkov,Super-heavy element research, Rep. Prog. Phys.78 (2015) 036301

  3. [11]

    Ter-Akopian and S.N

    G.M. Ter-Akopian and S.N. Dmitriev,Searches for superheavy elements in nature: Cosmic-ray nuclei; spontaneous fission, Nucl. Phys. A 944 (2015) 177 [inSPIRE]

  4. [12]

    Dzuba, V.V

    V.A. Dzuba, V.V. Flambaum and J.K. Webb,Isotope shift and search for metastable superheavy elements in astrophysical data, Phys. Rev. A 95 (2017) 062515 [arXiv:1703.04250]

  5. [13]

    Fowler, V.M

    P.H. Fowler, V.M. Clapham, V.G. Cowen, J.M. Kidd, and R.T. Moses,The charge spectrum of very heavy cosmic ray nuclei, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.A 318 (1970) 1

  6. [14]

    Price et al.,Study of the charge spectrum of extremely heavy cosmic rays using combined plastic detectors and nuclear emulsions, Phys

    P.B. Price et al.,Study of the charge spectrum of extremely heavy cosmic rays using combined plastic detectors and nuclear emulsions, Phys. Rev. D 3 (1971) 815

  7. [15]

    Cecchini et al.,Measurement of cosmic ray elemental composition from the CAKE balloon experiment, Adv

    S. Cecchini et al.,Measurement of cosmic ray elemental composition from the CAKE balloon experiment, Adv. Space Res46 (2010) 1382 [arXiv:0911.300]

  8. [16]

    Shirk and P.B

    E.K. Shirk and P.B. Price,Charge and energy spectra of cosmic rays with Z≥ 60: the SKYLAB experiment, Astrophys. J. 220 (1978) 719

  9. [17]

    Fowler et al.,Ariel 6 measurements of the fluxes of ultraheavy cosmic rays, Astrophys

    P.H. Fowler et al.,Ariel 6 measurements of the fluxes of ultraheavy cosmic rays, Astrophys. J. 314 (1987) 739

  10. [18]

    Binns et al.,Abundances of ultraheavy elements in the cosmic radiation: results from HEAO 3, Astrophys

    W.R. Binns et al.,Abundances of ultraheavy elements in the cosmic radiation: results from HEAO 3, Astrophys. J. 346 (1989) 997

  11. [19]

    Donnelly et al.,Actinide and ultra-heavy abundances in the local Galactic cosmic rays: an analysis of the results from the LDEF ultra-heavy cosmic-ray experiment, Astrophys

    J. Donnelly et al.,Actinide and ultra-heavy abundances in the local Galactic cosmic rays: an analysis of the results from the LDEF ultra-heavy cosmic-ray experiment, Astrophys. J. 747 (2012) 40

  12. [20]

    Rao,On the existence of super-heavy elements near Z = 114 and N = 184 in meteorites, Nucl

    M.N. Rao,On the existence of super-heavy elements near Z = 114 and N = 184 in meteorites, Nucl. Phys. 140 (1970) 69

  13. [21]

    Bhandari, J.N

    N. Bhandari, J.N. Goswami, D. Lal and A.S. Tamhane,Long-term fluxes of heavy cosmic-ray nuclei based on observations in meteorites and lunar samples, Astrophys. J. 185 (1973) 975

  14. [22]

    Flerov and A.S

    G.N. Flerov and A.S. Ilyinov,On the way to superelements, Pedagogika, Moscow Russia (1977) (in Russian)

  15. [23]

    Flerov and G.M

    G.N. Flerov and G.M. Ter-Akopian,The physical and chemical aspects of the search for superheavy elements, Pure and Appl. Chem.53 (1981) 909

  16. [24]

    Perelygin et al.,On search and identification of relatively short-lived superheavy nuclei (Z ≥ 110) by fossil track studies of meteoritic and lunar olivine crystals, Phys

    V.P. Perelygin et al.,On search and identification of relatively short-lived superheavy nuclei (Z ≥ 110) by fossil track studies of meteoritic and lunar olivine crystals, Phys. Atom. Nucl.66 (2003) 1569. – 9 –

  17. [25]

    Ginzburg, E.L

    V.L. Ginzburg, E.L. Feinberg, N.G. Polukhina, N.I. Starkov and V.A. Tsarev,Problems and horizons of the search for tracks of heavy and superheavy nuclei in olivine crystals from meteorites (OLIMPIYA project), Dokl. Phys. 50 (2005) 283

  18. [26]

    Alexeev et al.,Charge spectrum of heavy and superheavy components of Galactic cosmic rays: results of the OLIMPIYA experiment, Astrophys

    V. Alexeev et al.,Charge spectrum of heavy and superheavy components of Galactic cosmic rays: results of the OLIMPIYA experiment, Astrophys. J. 829 (2016) 120

  19. [27]

    stability island

    V. Alexeev et al.,Search for the “stability island” of superheavy nuclei using natural track detectors, Bull. Lebedev Phys. Inst.44 (2017) 336

  20. [28]

    Herzog et al.,Cosmic-ray exposure ages of pallasites, Meteorit

    G.F. Herzog et al.,Cosmic-ray exposure ages of pallasites, Meteorit. Planet. Sci.50 (2015) 86

  21. [29]

    P. Horn, M. Maurette and W.A. Von Oertzen,A study of the registration of Arsenic and Iodine ions in olivine and hypersthene crystals, Z. Naturforsch. A 22 (1967) 1793

  22. [30]

    Bagulya et al.,Search for superheavy elements in galactic cosmic rays, JETP Lett

    A.V. Bagulya et al.,Search for superheavy elements in galactic cosmic rays, JETP Lett. 97 (2013) 708

  23. [31]

    Aleksandrov et al.,Completely automated measurement facility (PAVICOM) for track-detector data processing, Nucl

    A.B. Aleksandrov et al.,Completely automated measurement facility (PAVICOM) for track-detector data processing, Nucl. Instr. Meth.A 535 (2004) 542 [INSPIRE]

  24. [32]

    Gorbunov, R.A

    S.A. Gorbunov, R.A. Rymzhanov, N.I. Starkov, A.E. Volkov and A.I. Malakhov,A model of chemical etching of olivine in the vicinity of the trajectory of a swift heavy ion, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.B 365 (2015) 656

  25. [33]

    Komiya and T

    Y. Komiya and T. Shigeyama,R-process element cosmic rays from neutron star mergers, Astrophys. J. 846 (2017) 143 [arXiv:1708.05638]

  26. [34]

    Thornton and S.C

    B.F. Thornton and S.C. Burdette,Neutron stardust and the elements of Earth, Nat. Chem. 11 (2019) 4

  27. [35]

    Banjac et al.,Galactic Cosmic Ray induced absorbed dose rate in deep space — Accounting for detector size, shape, material, as well as for the solar modulation, J

    S. Banjac et al.,Galactic Cosmic Ray induced absorbed dose rate in deep space — Accounting for detector size, shape, material, as well as for the solar modulation, J. Space Weather Space Clim. 9 (2019) A14

  28. [36]

    Giuliani et al.,Colloquium: Superheavy elements: Oganesson and beyond, Rev

    S.A. Giuliani et al.,Colloquium: Superheavy elements: Oganesson and beyond, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91 (2019) 011001 [inSPIRE]

  29. [37]

    Burbidge, G.R

    E.M. Burbidge, G.R. Burbidge, W.A. Fowler and F. Hoyle,Synthesis of the elements in stars, Rev. Mod. Phys.29 (1957) 547

  30. [38]

    Goriely, A

    S. Goriely, A. Bauswein, H.-T. Janka, O. Just and E. Pllumbi,The r-process nucleosynthesis and related challenges, EPJ Web Conf.165 (2017) 01025 [INSPIRE]

  31. [39]

    Winteler et al.,Magnetorotationally driven supernovae as the origin of early Galaxy r-process elements?, Astrophys

    C. Winteler et al.,Magnetorotationally driven supernovae as the origin of early Galaxy r-process elements?, Astrophys. J. Lett.750 (2012) L22

  32. [40]

    Bauswein, R

    A. Bauswein, R. Ardevol Pulpillo, H.-T. Janka and S. Goriely,Nucleosynthesis constraints on the neutron star-black hole merger rate, Astrophys. J. Lett.795 (2014) L9 [arXiv:1408.1783]

  33. [41]

    Thielemann, M

    F.-K. Thielemann, M. Eichler, I.V. Panov and B. Wehmeyer,Neutron star mergers and nucleosynthesis of heavy elements, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.67 (2017) 253 [arXiv:1710.02142]

  34. [42]

    Goriely et al.,New fission fragment distributions and r-process origin of the rare-earth elements, Phys

    S. Goriely et al.,New fission fragment distributions and r-process origin of the rare-earth elements, Phys. Rev. Lett.111 (2013) 242502 [arXiv:1311.5897]

  35. [43]

    Kasen, B

    D. Kasen, B. Metzger, J. Barnes, E. Quataert and E. Ramirez-Ruiz,Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron-star mergers from a gravitational-wave event, Nature 551 (2017) 80 [arXiv:1710.05463]

  36. [44]

    Abbott et al.,GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration, B.P. Abbott et al.,GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119 (2017) 161101 [INSPIRE]. – 10 –

  37. [45]

    Murphy et al.,Galactic cosmic ray origins and OB associations: evidence from SuperTIGER observations of elements26Fe through 40Zr, Astrophys

    R.P. Murphy et al.,Galactic cosmic ray origins and OB associations: evidence from SuperTIGER observations of elements26Fe through 40Zr, Astrophys. J. 831 (2016) 148 [INSPIRE]

  38. [46]

    Bagulya et al.,Charge spectrum of superheavy nuclei of galactic cosmic rays obtained in the OLIMPIA experiment, Bull

    A.V. Bagulya et al.,Charge spectrum of superheavy nuclei of galactic cosmic rays obtained in the OLIMPIA experiment, Bull. Lebedev Phys. Inst.42 (2015) 152 [INSPIRE]. – 11 –

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.