Skip to main content

Neutrinos have been detected at last! How big is this?


The very existence of neutrinos is something that admirers of The Big Bang Theory (the television show, not the actual theory) might think of in terms of a conversation between Leonard and Sheldon. 

The theoretical physicists (Sheldon Cooper's real-world colleagues) have been saying they exist for a long time now. Since a paper in 1930 by Wolfgang Pauli. 

But the experimentalists (Leonard Hofstadter's tribe) have never been able to find one of the little buggers. 

Now, it seems they have. Leonard has reported this and Sheldon has said "I told you so." 

Heck, the Japanese built a huge facility specifically devoted to the detection of neutrinos, called the Super Kamiokande. In essence, it is a big tank of water with a lot of photomultiplier tubes in it. The tubes allow the physicists to watch for the predicted "Cherenkov radiation." Whatever that is supposed to be. It didn't help.

Now, the credit for the key experimental observation goes to the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland. 

 The LHC generally works by colliding high-energy particle beams into one another. The energy of the impacts becomes matter in the form of exotic subatomic particles. 

In a particular recent run at the LHC, the experimentalists employed a new emulsion detector, made of metal plates interspersed with emulsion layers. This works like the film in old-school photography. (Kids, ask your parents.)  

Particles collided during the test, as planned, and this produced neutrinos which smashed into the dense metal of the plates, creating observable imprints in the emulsion. Not so much the neutrino as the wake of a neutrino. Still, a breakthrough. 

I do wish somebody would explain how big of a breakthrough this is. Assume I know nothing more about the assumption than Penny. How much if at all does this change what we know about how the world works that we can now be sure neutrinos exist? 

Somewhere on a cloud, the spirit of Wolfgang Pauli is smiling. He looks rather grim in the above photo, though. 

Elusive neutrino candidates detected in breakthrough physics experiment | Space

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak