Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > Astronomy and Amateur Science
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 07-10-2015, 06:30 PM
Chochawker's Avatar
Chochawker (Malcolm)
Registered User

Chochawker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
Neutrino Oscillations

The 2015 Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded to the leaders of two very important neutrino experiments:

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_priz...aureates/2015/

Symmetry magazine has an article here:

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/arti...o-oscillations

And the websites for the two experiments are here:

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/arti...o-oscillations

http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-10-2015, 07:00 PM
Somnium's Avatar
Somnium (Aidan)
Aidan

Somnium is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,669
Well deserved !
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-10-2015, 07:29 PM
AlexN's Avatar
AlexN
Widefield wuss

AlexN is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Caboolture, Australia
Posts: 6,994
I read an article yesterday about this then surprisingly I read another article about an experiment taking place in the US today where scientists are beaming neutrinos backwards and forwards between two giant detectors and accelerators 400m underground over a distance of 800 miles and we're conveying a similar assertion. The total amount of neutrinos making it from accelerator 1 to detector 1 was correct however there were accelerating electron neutrinos and detecting a mixture of muon and electron neutrinos and they seemed quite stumped by their results.

Mind boggling sometimes to think all the things man kind has seemingly figured out and still we know practically nothing about almost anything outside our atmosphere or beneath our oceans.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-10-2015, 08:49 PM
Chochawker's Avatar
Chochawker (Malcolm)
Registered User

Chochawker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
There are a number of accelerator based neutrino oscillation experiments around the world as there is still much to be determined.

In particular, the potential that neutrino mixing might have played a significant role in generating a matter/anti-matter asymmetry in the early universe.

This link likely lists one of the experiments that you were reading about:

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/part...neutrinos.html
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-10-2015, 11:32 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Think of their abundance.
A point in fact any point in the Universe will have infinite trajectories each mapping the course of a neutrino such that their energy could be zero to infinite but they are every where.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16-10-2015, 10:59 PM
sharpiel
Registered User

sharpiel is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 719
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave View Post
Think of their abundance.
A point in fact any point in the Universe will have infinite trajectories each mapping the course of a neutrino such that their energy could be zero to infinite but they are every where.
Quantum poetry in your words Alex. Well said!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22-10-2015, 12:34 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
That is a nice compliment Les thank you.
I try to imagine the sea of them with matter floating in that sea.
I think GR somehow is describing the flow of neutrinos.
Not being a scientist I don't know how to test that idea.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22-10-2015, 05:42 PM
Eratosthenes's Avatar
Eratosthenes (Peter)
Trivial High Priest

Eratosthenes is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 392
every "thing" possesses the property of mass (wait til the mass of the photon is measured - all hell will break loose in the Physics departments of University Psychiatric wards around the world)

Again the reductionist and stochastic lunacy of Modern Physics has its inherent ignorance and erroneous mathematical idealistic basis exposed for all to see.

The deranged impotence of the Standard model of Particle Physics is being re-written as we speak......AGAIN.

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22-10-2015, 10:32 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Well science seems to work using models that enable predictions to be made and models may change if they improve things.
So I imagine as the years roll by models will evolve or be replaced.
I wonder what models 100 years from now will say.
And will they be much different to those of today.

I spent years developing an idea on how gravity may work.
I concluded a Le Sage push gravity view unfortunately it took me 5 years to find it was first proposed by Le Sage in 1745.

neutrinos*would seem the perfect particle for a push gravity universe.
Describing it with math would seem impossible.
How could you manage it.
Certainly GR and Newton provide better models but I till would like a model that could show all neutrinos*paths and how various objects would behalve in such models.

neutrinos*

Last edited by xelasnave; 22-10-2015 at 10:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22-10-2015, 10:55 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
I can't edit my last post so I won't.
But neutrinos*would pass for the nonexistent aether.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 22-10-2015, 11:48 PM
AlexN's Avatar
AlexN
Widefield wuss

AlexN is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Caboolture, Australia
Posts: 6,994
Peter,
I'm sure there is a Nobel prize in it for you if you care to outline where the derangement of the currently evolving standard model lies.

I will happily admit I don't feel our current standard model is the final answer but I feel it's much better than it was in the 1940's. Even think that it was not long prior to that, mankind believed the atom was as it is named. That which can not be divided. Now the standard model contains 6 leptons, 6 quarks, 4 carriers and the higgs boson.. And to think that the higgs was postulated in the 60s based off calculations derived from the then standard model only to be discovered in 2012 tells me that whilst incomplete the SM is on the right track. I have hope for the graviton, and hope that between the ILC and the LHC we will learn more about dark matter...

But for now I am happy with the standard model, but would be happy to abandon it in a heartbeat if you could put forth a different theory that fits the observed data so well and can unify gravity into the world of the small.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 22-10-2015, 11:58 PM
Eratosthenes's Avatar
Eratosthenes (Peter)
Trivial High Priest

Eratosthenes is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 392
....and yet the insanity of Quantum Electrodynamics developed by Schwinger, Feynman and Tomonaga in the 1940s predicts that photons can possess mass - and in some cases a large mass. (they escape this lunacy by suggesting that as long as the mass vanishes relatively quickly, then its permitted. Quantum foam is another animal all together ladies and gentlemen - foam seems to be floating around between the ears of physicists in departments and asylums around the world)

There seems to be no limit to the depths of Psychiatric lunacy that modern Physics can plunge to....

................................. ................................... ............................
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 23-10-2015, 08:46 AM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 7,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eratosthenes View Post
....There seems to be no limit to the depths of Psychiatric lunacy that modern Physics can plunge to....

................................. ................................... ............................
That depends on your definition of the term "lunacy".

Last edited by bojan; 23-10-2015 at 02:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 23-10-2015, 09:33 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
I agree with Alex.
Peter I sence your frustration but which thread of the standard model would you change.
Even as a non scientist I find stuff strange but what can you do.
There are a lot of bricks in the wall which ones need replacing and is there a better model.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 23-10-2015, 09:42 AM
sjastro's Avatar
sjastro
Registered User

sjastro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eratosthenes View Post
....and yet the insanity of Quantum Electrodynamics developed by Schwinger, Feynman and Tomonaga in the 1940s predicts that photons can possess mass - and in some cases a large mass. (they escape this lunacy by suggesting that as long as the mass vanishes relatively quickly, then its permitted. Quantum foam is another animal all together ladies and gentlemen - foam seems to be floating around between the ears of physicists in departments and asylums around the world)

There seems to be no limit to the depths of Psychiatric lunacy that modern Physics can plunge to....

................................. ................................... ............................
So you are now engaging in blatant dishonesty or a total lack of comprehension of the subject.

Schwinger and Feymann considered photons to have a fictional mass to explain the Lamb shift (spectral shift of hydrogen emission lines) in 1947.
QED is the application of Special Relativity (SR) to Quantum Mechanics but in 1947 it was a work in progress and scientists were still struggling with some very unusual consequences of QED such as negative probabilities and negative energies. Electromagnetic fields explained as mathematical operators for simple harmonic oscillators was in its infancy and renormalization theory which addressed problems such as Lamb shift was still decades away to being accepted as mainstream.

Schwinger and Feynmann attempted to explain Lamb shift using non relativistic calculations and the concept of fictional mass which they eventually conceded WAS WRONG.
Strange how you conveniently omit this point or are you naive enough to think QED is still stuck in the world of 1947.

If you seriously think that Quantum physicists of TODAY hold this 1947 view, it is like the snake beginning by swallowing its own tail and eventually consuming itself in the process.
QED is the application of special relativity to Quantum Mechanics where photons have a zero REST mass. If not QED collapses like a deck of cards as it is not consistent with special relativity, the theory that it is built on.

Photons travelling at c however do exhibit properties associated with mass.
Do you understand what a zero rest mass is? Probably not.

Here is some simple arithmetic for you.
The total energy of a particle according to special relativity is given by the formula.

E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4. p is momentum, m is rest mass and c the speed of light.

For a photon the rest mass is zero hence
E=pc.

While a photon has a zero REST mass, it is a particle with RELATIVISTIC "mass", given that relativistic mass is the total energy of the particle.
Photons possess a momentum p=E/c which is a very "mass like" characteristic given in classical physics p=mv where v is the particle velocity.
The photoelectric effect illustrates this as electrons are knocked out of atoms by photons.

So while photons have zero rest mass, it exhibits "mass properties" as a particle travelling at c.

Last edited by sjastro; 23-10-2015 at 01:30 PM. Reason: Additional Info
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 23-10-2015, 02:09 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Schwinger and Feynmann attempted to explain Lamb shift using non relativistic calculations and the concept of fictional mass which they eventually conceded WAS WRONG.

But they were wrong throw everything out before and after.

Sorry Steven but going on the past my reply may be all you get
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 23-10-2015, 02:27 PM
Eratosthenes's Avatar
Eratosthenes (Peter)
Trivial High Priest

Eratosthenes is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave View Post
I agree with Alex.
Peter I sence your frustration .
the last time I sensed genuine frustration was in early Spring 1986

I enjoy studying the fundamentalist religious sects that base their scripture on the Scientific method....

The various temples of worship commonly known as laboratories and research centers are of particular interest to me.

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 23-10-2015, 02:37 PM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 7,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eratosthenes View Post
so you agree with my general analysis
If the "lunacy" really means "creativity" or "inventivity" then yes..

Please confess - you are just pulling our legs here and actually provoking the discussion
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 23-10-2015, 02:38 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Well all is good then.
The wonderful thing about reality is we each enjoy our own version.
Are you hinting at something as I fear I may have missed your point.
Can you be specific are you talking about scientology.
Well I must tell you I don't like Tom Cruise he parts his hair on the wrong side.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 23-10-2015, 02:43 PM
Eratosthenes's Avatar
Eratosthenes (Peter)
Trivial High Priest

Eratosthenes is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by bojan View Post
If the "lunacy" really means "creativity" or "inventivity" then yes..

Please confess - you are just pulling our legs here and actually provoking the discussion
How creative is Science when compared to Art or music?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 10:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement