New Radioactivity Measurement Could Boost Precision of Dark Matter Experiments

The process finds minuscule amounts of radioactive material in metals

A gold mixing chamber for the Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search.

A mixing chamber for the Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search.

Paul Brink, SuperCDMS Collaboration, Stanford University and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A concentration of one part per billion is like a pinch of salt in 10 tons of potato chips—and scientists can now find radioactive particles at concentrations millions of times smaller. In the Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, researchers describe successfully detecting radioactive uranium and thorium hiding among something like a million billion other atoms.

The ability to spot these tiny amounts of radioactive elements, which occur naturally in metals such as gold that are often used in laboratory instruments, could have big consequences for particle physics. Radioactive traces limit sensitivity in detectors searching for exotic particles, including those that might make up dark matter; a minuscule radioactive impurity inside a detector can be mistaken for a particle's signature, throwing off the entire experiment.

“Before we do anything else, we need the cleanest possible materials,” says Michelle Dolinski, a particle physicist at Drexel University and the Enriched Xenon Observatory, who was not involved with the study. Her work on rare particle searches intertwines with that of chemists tracing radioactivity.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“Physics needs really push the chemistry,” says Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) chemist and study co-author Eric Hoppe. He and the other researchers pinpointed small concentrations of radioactive thorium and uranium in metallic samples by using a mass spectrometer, which separates particles based on their mass.

First, the scientists had to make radioactive elements more massive than a metal's other atoms, explains lead author Khadouja Harouaka, also a chemist at PNNL. To do so, they heated a metallic sample until it became very reactive and pushed it into a chamber full of oxygen. Any thorium or uranium in the sample then combined with the oxygen to form molecules massive enough to stand out in spectrometer data. Scientists next counted these oxidized radioactive particles and calculated their original concentration— a value that suggests how much radiation the material would introduce to physics experiments.

Whereas many previously developed particle-detection methods must be modified for each specific metal, the new technique always uses the same heating and oxidizing steps. “The whole palette of materials is opening up,” Hoppe says.

Material options are critical for the design of particle detectors, says Priscilla Cushman, a physicist at the University of Minnesota and the Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search experiment, who was not involved with the study. “There are so many little pieces of [a dark matter] experiment that have different functions,” she says. “The materials that are used for electrical or thermal connections, or even insulation, all those have to be radio pure.” Every new metal examined can be considered for detector components. Hoppe is also looking ahead: “We're constantly trying to knock down all of the suspect [radioactive] materials. This work is a nice step forward.”

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe