Another Crackpot Theory: Neutrinos

In summary, the neutrinos may not amount for the "missing" mass of the universe that is unobservable; however, the flaw I see with this argument is that if the neutrinos can have mass, then why are they still referred to as ghost particles? The neutrinos travel at the speed of light, further complicating my confusion.
  • #1
theLHC
11
0
Hey guys. Just before you read this, let it be known that I am merely a 16 year old, and so these are basically ideas from one who is not as educated in the field of astrophysics as others, so forgive me if this concept may sound utterly rubbish to you.

Ok. So here it is. Neutrinos. There is a debate going on (or was going on:confused:) that the neutrinos may amount for the "missing" mass of the universe that is unobservable. Once again, I am not in step with the astrophysical community, so please update me on this if there have been any developments, but nevertheless, here are my thoughts.

Supposedly, there are so many of these neutrinos that if they had even a tiny, insignificant mass, in total they would equal to a significant portion of that so called "missing" mass. The flaw that I see with this argument is that if the neutrinos can have mass, then why are they still referred to as ghost particles? This reference to them being ghost particles means that they pass through this unnoticed due to their almost unexisting mass. On top of that, the neutrinos travel at the speed of light, further complicating my confusion. I then came to the conclusion that the neutrinos have no mass what so ever, since if they had any sort of mass they would be detected in size because they would increase in mass since they are traveling at the speed of light.

Isn't it true that in order for an object to travel at the speed of light, it must be massless?

But then again, I may be mistaken, seeing that this was out of a book that I read 2 years ago and am trying to recall all that I read, so there may be some discrepancies to what I just stated.

Please give your thoughts on this.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
theLHC said:
There is a debate going on (or was going on:confused:) that the neutrinos may amount for the "missing" mass of the universe that is unobservable.
I think that has been discarded the observed mass is too low.
if the neutrinos can have mass, then why are they still referred to as ghost particles? This reference to them being ghost particles means that they pass through this unnoticed due to their almost unexisting mass.
They pass through things unnoticed because they have no charge, and very low mass. Ghost particle doesn't mean anything in physics, neutrinos are completely real and observable
On top of that, the neutrinos travel at the speed of light, further complicating my confusion. Isn't it true that in order for an object to travel at the speed of light, it must be massless?
They don't travel at c, having very small mass they travel very close to c but not quite at it.In almost every medium other than vacuum they do travel faster than light but this perfectly allowed - the rule is only against going faster than 'c' = speed of light in a vacuum.
 
  • #3
Hmm, yes I see what you mean. Well thank you for clearing up my misunderstanding sir.
 

Related to Another Crackpot Theory: Neutrinos

1. What is the theory of neutrinos?

The theory of neutrinos is a concept in physics that proposes that neutrinos, which are tiny subatomic particles with no electric charge, have mass and can interact with other particles through weak nuclear forces. This theory was first suggested in the 1930s and has been extensively studied and supported by experiments in the decades since.

2. How does this theory impact our understanding of the universe?

This theory has greatly expanded our understanding of the universe by providing insight into the behavior of subatomic particles and their effects on the laws of physics. Neutrinos are believed to be a key component in many fundamental processes, such as nuclear reactions in stars and the formation of the early universe.

3. What evidence supports the existence of neutrinos?

There is a wealth of evidence that supports the existence of neutrinos. For instance, scientists have detected neutrinos in various experiments, including those involving nuclear reactions and particle collisions. Additionally, the observation of neutrino oscillations, where neutrinos change between different types, provides strong evidence for their existence and mass.

4. Could this theory have practical applications?

While the theory of neutrinos has primarily been studied for its impact on our understanding of the universe, there are also practical applications that could arise from it. For example, neutrinos have been proposed as a potential source of energy, and their ability to pass through matter without interacting could also be utilized for imaging and detection purposes.

5. Are there any criticisms or controversies surrounding this theory?

Like any scientific theory, there have been some criticisms and controversies surrounding the theory of neutrinos. Some scientists have questioned the accuracy of experimental results and the interpretation of data. However, the majority of evidence and research supports the validity of this theory, and it continues to be an active area of study in the scientific community.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
3
Replies
83
Views
12K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
10
Views
664
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top