As a neutrino is capable of movement at a rate greater than that of light, and as such flows backwards through time relative to our own perspective, then why do we attempt to understand it through causality, rather than effect and cause as opposed to cause and effect? Why should we expect that a particle which transverses time in the reverse would be born of the decay of radioactive elements as opposed to possibly being the catalyst for the decay of those elements? Perhaps our sun isn't a producer of neutrinos but is instead a magnet for them, where neutrinos are attracted to massive objects and heavy elements, thus stars and singularities tend to absorb neutrinos, but our observation of this interaction is in reverse, leading us to conclude that the opposite is true. Might it even be that neutrinos originate from the time of Big Freeze, progressing backward through time, lacking in both mass and energy as is consistent with estimations of the state of the universe at the time of Big Freeze, traveling backward toward that which it's attracted to, which is mass, where the most massive object to ever exist would in fact be the point of Big Bang, the singularity which once contained all that there is and ever will be? Could it in fact be that neutrinos are more than the cause of radioactive decay, but in fact the catalyst for the universe itself, the very inspiration for Big Bang? If they have zero energy, no definite mass and originate from the future, wouldn't a neutrino be the perfect tool for the creation of something from nothing?