2015 Nobel Prize in Physics announcement

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the announcement of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physics, particularly focusing on the recognition of neutrino oscillations. Participants share their excitement about the announcement, reflect on past experiences related to neutrino research, and engage in technical discussions about the implications of the prize on neutrino mass and oscillation theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express excitement about the Nobel Prize announcement and its significance for neutrino oscillations.
  • There are reflections on past research experiences related to neutrino projects, with some participants sharing personal anecdotes about their connections to the field.
  • One participant notes that the results for which the prize was awarded are over a decade old, suggesting they are not new to the scientific community.
  • There are discussions about the implications of the prize on the understanding of neutrino masses, with some questioning whether the probability of the three neutrino flavors being massive has changed.
  • Some participants argue that the awarding of the Nobel Prize does not influence the underlying physics or the probabilities associated with neutrino masses.
  • There is a debate about the validity of certain derivations related to neutrino masses, with differing opinions on whether they hold under specific conditions.
  • Concerns are raised regarding Lorentz-violating neutrino oscillations, with some participants stating that there have been no observations supporting such phenomena.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of excitement and skepticism regarding the implications of the Nobel Prize on the understanding of neutrinos. While some agree on the significance of the prize, others contest the interpretations of its impact on current theories and models, indicating that multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions involve assumptions about the nature of neutrino masses and the implications of the Nobel Prize on scientific credibility, which are not universally accepted. The conversation also touches on the historical context of neutrino research and the timeline of relevant discoveries.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the history and development of neutrino physics, as well as those following the implications of major scientific awards on research credibility and community recognition.

  • #31
No Chinese (from mainland) has got the award( in physics), that's a pity.

Nevertheless Tu Youyou got the Noble(in nature science), and becomes the 1st Chinese
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Could this discovery answer any questions about ageing ?
 
  • #33
Neutrino oscillations (=this topic)? No.

The nobel prize in chemistry for DNA repair? Sure.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
  • #34
dodonaomik said:
No Chinese (from mainland) has got the award( in physics), that's a pity.

TD Lee, CS Wu and CN Yang were all born on the mainland.
 
  • #35
One thing that has me puzzled about the Miniboone experiment, which refuted the implication of a 4th neutrino species in the LSND data, is why they didn't use exactly the same energy, and distance to the detector, as were employed in the LSND experiment? It seems like that would be the ultimate check on the LSND results.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
10K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
14K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
972
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K