well, really the neutrino is needed just to conserve lepton number so it could be:
the relationship I was getting at was more along the lines of electron capture vs positron emission than time reversing normal beta+/- decay.
I am reminded of a particular xkcd main times while perusing a slashdot science story. http://xkcd.com/675/
Oh, not in response to your response, more to the GP. Though I think you meant an proton/neutron and a neutrino of the right energy meeting at exactly the same time since we're talking about radioactive decay.
You'll also notice that the discovery rate seems to "pulsate" with a period of about 12 times per year (this is most obvious in the 2000s when the discovery rate was mostly uniform throughout the year). I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to explain why that is (hint, skies need to be very dark to observe faint asteroids).
then why wouldn't it be 13 times per year?
I would guess that some of the data is submitted monthly and the tracts show when the data was submitted, not necessarily observed. there's also a lot of big pulses early on, far larger than the overall rate would see to indicate as within the normal deviation of observation rate at that point. hence, the thought that it's mapping based on submission date and some are submitting bulk results on a monthly or quarterly basis.
If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.
