According to Holmlid, there is a high flux of neutral atomic fragments that receive a ton of kinetic energy from the primary reaction(nucleon particle decay). These fragments would dissipate their kinetic energy through particle collision cascades. That particle collision cascade would produce the pink noise.

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Keep in mind that as large massive charged particles (200x that of an > electron), muons would not penetrate materials very well. For a given > energy, they are moving much slower than electrons. Also, because they are > so heavy, they will stop slowly, and hence, not create much bremsstrahlung > radiation. > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 1:11 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> >> >> BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particular detector >> as 1/f^2 noise ?? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Nigel, >> >> >> >> Since you noticed the fit initially, were you looking for it based on >> phenomena from another field ? >> >> >> >> I see from Alan’s posting that the context is no mystery – except to >> someone who was not paying attention to every detail of an excellent >> presentation <g> >> >> However, I think Nigel is looking for deeper significance. Universal >> theories of pink noise are incomplete. According to Wiki, the Tweedie >> hypothesis has been proposed to explain the genesis of pink noise on the >> basis of a mathematical convergence theorem related to statistical analysis >> in many systems, yet … this signal is not pink noise per se. In general >> the spectrum of pink noise is 1/f for what are said to be >> one-dimensional signals. >> >> Perhaps two-dimensional signals have a weaker power spectrum which is the >> reciprocal of f^2 ? At any rate, pink noise would be an obvious place to >> start a search for statistical significance. >> >> >> >> >> > >