ah, KEK/jparc. Just gave a presentation to some of them. May be doin woik for them in a coupla months.Its not clear to me yet, but I'm a bit out of touch. I always assumed that n and anti-n were different, because they were postulated to balance up lepton numbers in beta decay and muon decay. If a muon n is the same as a muon anti-n then I can't see why they are needed to balance things up (apart from sorting out momentum conservation). Then I heard, to my surprise, that they could be their own antiparticle. There is a group at my old university working with the Japs on this sort of thing, and I heard a report from them at an alumni open day last year.
Well I guess since it appears that what they have found is cyclical (on a 33 day cycle) and carbon dating is over millions of years, then provided average decay rate has remained constant over time then the carbon 14 dating should still work within the limitations of accuracy that it already had...
If however the the emissions from the sun are having the described effect, and these emissions have been getting greater or lesser over time then it is feasible that carbon dating estimates could be out by a larger than anticipated margin
As an example, this post will cause me trouble. Simply as I have told you folks some things.. that some people..do not want you to know. Those who wish to maintain monopolies in science with regard to black ops and societal controls. Ie, unwanted undesirable steering committees who operate in secret for their own benefit only.
I have an eagle research branded ER1600 Brown's gas generator.
It WILL I repeat WILL break down ALL radioactive substances, with one single pass of the material (DUT) being brought to the liquidus state, via the Brown's gas flame.
Ie, it will not even boil water....but it will sublimate tungsten.