CNB (Cosmic Neutrino Background)

  • Thread starter RandallB
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Neutrino
In summary, the article discusses how there is much hope for using neutrino observatories to probe deeper into the time line. The LHC will also make valuable contributions toward our understanding of the early universe. However, we do not yet know what to expect as a result of these observatories.
  • #1
RandallB
1,550
0
From a thread on “void theory vs. acceleration” (link in quote below);
Chronos said:
Neutrino observatories are the next wave of observational physics. They are capable of probing much deeper into the time line.
I doubt much more controversy will arise from these efforts, but it will be fascinating.
The LHC will also make valuable contributions toward our understanding of the early universe as well, IMO.
Rather than hijack the other thread for more detail on a side topic, I’ve opened this new thread.

I’m interested in how science hopes to use “Neutrino observatories”.
I’ve not seen much on the hopeful physics of making these observations which I see as based on two parts 1) What we hope to observe and 2) How we hope to observe it.

Fundamentally I assume somewhere between the Big Bang Time of t=0 and the 380,000 years for the time of Last Scattering for the CMB there is a time of Big Bang Neutrino Generation. This should have created a CNB (Cosmic Neutrino Background) with a surface larger than the SLS. Granting that detecting them is a major observational challenge, do we have some idea of what we should be looking for in those observations?

That is during the time prior to SLS do current theories offer expectations of how many neutrinos should have been generated and when so as to define the size CNB surface, and how many neutrinos from a CNBS (Cosmic Neutrino Background Surface) should be expected now?
I would expect that various current theoretical views of how to apply the Standard Model and Inflation during the time of Big Bang Plasma involved sould generate differences in theory predictions.

In addition to how many are generate, an issue I see as in need of predicting is over what time period that CNB would be generated. Unlike the SLS being created during just a few thousand years creating a relatively “thin” observable surface; since neutrinos are very ‘transparent’ thus the observable CNB surface could be notably “thick”.
Also, this Thick Surface of CNB would clearly be much larger than SLS prior to 500,000 years post Big Bang. However, since we seem to have pretty good confirmation that neutrinos do not travel at “c” the SLS photons at some point may catch up with and pass the CNBS. Meaning the observable CNBS by now might actually be smaller than the SLS.

So to the question:
Are there any peer reviewed speculations applying current theories addressing some of the components needed to define a CNB and what might be available to current observation of a CNBS?
That should be a necessary base from which to design a system to observe those neutrinos.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
RandallB said:
...1) What we hope to observe and 2) How we hope to observe it.

... do we have some idea of what we should be looking for in those observations?
...

I don't have time to think this thru and give an intelligent answer.

I think last scatter for neutrinos is around 1 second after putative bang (but inflation scenarios complicate the whole issue of when you say it was---is the bang the moment when inflation stops and the putative inflaton decays, or what).

Anyway setting aside all this scenario vagueness, neutrino background was released very very early.

And expansion slows down relativistic particles and saps their energy. So the temperature of the neutrion background is estimated to be about the same as the CMB

I read about this some years back and am trying to remember. There is some effect which I believe makes the neutrino background expected temperature to be slightly LESS. Maybe 2.4 kelvin or 1.9 kelvin instead of 2.7 kelvin like the CMB.

Right now I can't do better. I may have the direction of the effect wrong. Maybe someone with a fresher memory will jump in and clarify. In any case it is very interesting.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Well! There is a Wikipedia bit about CNB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_neutrino_background

The estimated time then was 2 seconds.
the estimated temperature now is 1.95 kelvin

The reason CNB is so hard to see is that low energy Ns interact with matter even more weakly than higher energy.
So seeing the CNB is very difficult.

All these slow neutrinos around us and we can't see them! Eeeww. Jellyfish. Icky! :biggrin:
 
  • #4
This seems to me that we do not as of yet from a theoretical perspective have a very good idea of how or what to predict should be available for observation as a CNB.

First comes a reasonable description of just what a neutrino is relative to its behaviors.
First expectations for them was they were similar to photons being without mass should always have local movement at the speed of “c”. That would be consistent with what is being described in the Wikipedia article, assuming a speed of “c” neutrinos would have a “frequency” like light or photons in the CMB that translates into a “temperature”.

But I though science had revised that concept of the neutrino for one that does have “mass” – meaning they could be stationary or move at any speed below “c” just as any other elements of mass could do. I would not think the number of neutrinos detected at whatever speed would be translatable to a temperature under what I thought was the current view of what neutrinos are.
For example in the experiments on sun sourced neutrinos that helped establish they did in fact have “mass” of different amounts based on family type (electron, mu, tau); I don’t recall any of those detected amounts being based on a “temperature” measurement.

I’m I correct the current view of a neutrino would allow it to assume any speed and even slow enough to be individually captured within the gravitational control of a mass like the Earth or sun etc?

Would not be the first time wikipedia was out of date or not entirely complete in describing the current scientific understanding of something.
– — — – – —
Other than what a neutrino is, we have what happen after the Big Bang to generate them. Does the proposed “CνB decoupled from matter when the universe was 2 seconds old” project a total mass for them relative to some volume (like the volume then, which contained the matter and antimatter that eventually reduced to the mass of our currently observable universe)?

Also, in addition to those "2 sec." neutrinos might there be more added as coming from electron, positron, and quark etc antimatter annihilation possesses that occurred well after the first 2 seconds?
I don’t know where I saw it, but I though some of the modern high energy experiments indicated some annihilations during the BB era should also have produced neutrinos, not just pure photons.
This is where I derived my speculations about the CNB source “surface” having a “thickness” with neutrinos being generated at different BB time intervals unlike the SLS.
I’ve not seen that speculation anywhere else, so I can see where my “thickness” idea would be wrong if there were no additional neutrinos produces at various times such as during antimatter annihilations.
– — — – – —
Just having a hard time trying to find a complete treatment somewhere of what current theory expects about the nature of neutrinos during the Big Bang and what they should look like now relative to how we could observe them.

It seems to me that a “low temperature” may not be issue as it does not IMO apply to the travel of something with mass like it does for photons.
Rather I think the bigger problem in detecting them is in defining how many there should be and just how very slow they might be moving relative to us now.
 
  • #5
Randall, your questions make sense. There is plenty I don't understand here. I will keep an eye out for more information about the CNB (which we assume is there but are unable so far to detect). But it will probably be a while before I encounter some more satisfactory information on this. What would really be nice is if some other PFer(s) would show up and do some explaining about the CNB. If you find anything, please keep us posted.
 

1. What is the Cosmic Neutrino Background?

The Cosmic Neutrino Background (CNB) is a sea of low-energy, relic neutrinos that permeate the entire universe. It is considered to be one of the oldest and most abundant forms of matter in the universe.

2. How were CNB neutrinos created?

CNB neutrinos were created during the early stages of the universe, specifically during the Big Bang. As the universe rapidly expanded and cooled, the high-energy particles that were present at the time eventually cooled down and formed into the low-energy neutrinos that we observe today.

3. How do we detect CNB neutrinos?

CNB neutrinos are notoriously difficult to detect due to their low energy and weak interactions with matter. Currently, the most promising method of detection is through large-scale experiments that use specialized detectors, such as the Super-Kamiokande in Japan and the IceCube Neutrino Observatory in Antarctica.

4. What can CNB tell us about the early universe?

CNB provides us with valuable information about the conditions of the early universe. By studying the properties and behavior of these relic neutrinos, scientists can gain insights into the fundamental forces and particles that were present during the first moments of the universe's existence.

5. How does the study of CNB contribute to our understanding of the universe?

The study of CNB is crucial in understanding the structure and evolution of the universe. By studying these relic neutrinos, scientists can better understand the origins of matter and the processes that shaped the universe into what we see today. This knowledge can also help us to further our understanding of particle physics and the fundamental laws of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
969
Replies
8
Views
898
Replies
39
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
37
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top