Su1352 - Oncology Navigation Decreases Time to Treatment in Patients with Pancreatic Malignancy

Enomoto, Laura M.; Fenstermaker, Joyce; Desnoyer, Rodwige; Pasche, Boris; Blackstock, A. William; Howerton, Russell; Clark, Clancy J.; Levine, Edward A.; Shen, Perry

doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(18)34288-4

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…and normalized to the branching fraction of the specific β decay (Enomoto, 2005). In equation (2) w = 1+E is the total energy of the β-particle (E being its kinetic energy), p = w 2 − 1 is the momentum of the β-particle, q is the total energy of the neutrino (equal to its momentum as the neutrino mass is negligible) satisfying E+q = E end , where E end is the endpoint energy of the transition (in the case of a transition to ground state, it is the Q-value), and Z is the charge of the daughter nucleus.…”

Section: Contrasting Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radiogenic power and geoneutrino luminosity of the Earth and other terrestrial bodies through time

McDonough

Šrámek

Wipperfurth

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points:• Radiogenic heat production and geoneutrino luminosity calculated over the age of the Earth • Simple formulae proposed for evaluation at arbitrary planetary composition • Differences in radioactive decay parameters highlighted between nuclear physics and geological communities AbstractWe report the Earth's rate of radiogenic heat production and (anti)neutrino luminosity from geologically relevant short-lived radionuclides (SLR) and long-lived radionuclides (LLR) using decay constants from the geological community, updated nuclear physics parameters, and calculations of the β spectra. We carefully account for all branches in 40 K decay using the updated β − energy spectrum from physics and an updated branching ratio from geological studies. We track the time evolution of the radiogenic power and luminosity of the Earth over the last 4.57 billion years, assuming an absolute abundance for the refractory elements in the silicate Earth and key volatile/refractory element ratios (e.g., Fe/Al, K/U, and Rb/Sr) to set the abundance levels for the moderately volatile elements. The relevant decays for the present-day heat production in the Earth (19.9 ± 3.0 TW) are from 40 K, 87 Rb, 147 Sm, 232 Th, 235 U, and 238 U. Given element concentrations in kg-element/kg-rock and density ρ in kg/m 3 , a simplified equation to calculate the heat production in a rock is:3.387 × 10 −3 [K] + 0.01139 [Rb] + 0.04607 [Sm] + 26.18 [Th] + 98.29 [U]The radiogenic heating rate of earth-like material at Solar System formation was some 10 3 to 10 4 times greater than present-day values, largely due to decay of 26 Al in the silicate fraction, which was the dominant radiogenic heat source for the first ∼ 10 My. Decay of 60 Fe contributed a non-negligible amount of heating during the first ∼ 15 My after CAI (Calcium Aluminum Inclusion) formation, interestingly within the time frame of core-mantle segregation. Using factors and equations presented here, one can calculate the first-order thermal and (anti)neutrino luminosity history of various size bodies in the solar system and exoplanets. Plain Language SummaryThe decay of radioactive elements in planetary interior's produces heat that drives the dynamic processes of convection (core and mantle), melting and volcanism in rocky bodies in the solar system and beyond. For elements with half-lives of 100,000 to 100 billion years, uncertainties in their decay constants range from 0.2% to ∼ 4% absolute and about 1% to 4% relative when comparing data sources in physics and geology. These differences, combined with uncertainties in Q (heat of reaction) values, lead to diverging results for heat production and for predictions of the amount of energy removed from the rocky body by emitted (anti)neutrinos.

show abstract

Section: Contrasting Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…α being the fine-structure constant, accounts for the Coulombic interaction between the daughter nucleus and the outgoing β-particle (Enomoto, 2005). The shape factor S(w), often written at S(p, q), is equal to 1 for allowed transitions and has a more complex energydependence in the case of forbidden transitions.…”

Section: Contrasting Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%