Evidence for the existence of neutrinos.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the evidence for the existence of neutrinos, exploring both experimental findings and theoretical underpinnings. Participants examine historical context, conservation laws, and the implications of mass-energy equivalence in relation to neutrinos.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Fermi postulated the existence of neutrinos in 1930 due to conservation of momentum considerations.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of experimental evidence, referencing the first detection of neutrinos in 1956 and the existence of a neutrino observatory in Sudbury, England.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the statement regarding conservation of energy versus conservation of energy/mass, expressing interest in the theoretical rationale behind the necessity for neutrinos beyond beta emission and recoil nucleus.
  • There is a discussion about Einstein's mass-energy equivalence, with participants noting that mass and energy are manifestations of the same entity, and exploring implications for photons and their massless nature.
  • One participant questions whether conservation of momentum alone could be sufficient evidence for neutrinos.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of conservation laws and their implications for neutrinos. There is no consensus on the sufficiency of evidence or the theoretical explanations provided.

Contextual Notes

Some statements rely on specific interpretations of conservation laws and the nature of mass and energy, which may not be universally accepted or understood. The discussion includes unresolved questions about the implications of these concepts.

_Mayday_
Messages
808
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Evidence for the existence of neutrinos.

[solved]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Two points: at the elementary particle level, there is no "conservation of energy". There is 'conservation of energy/mass'. As far as conservation of momentum is concerned, that was, in fact, the reason Fermi "postulated" the existence of neutrinos in 1930.

What do you think of as "evidence"? I would think in terms of experimental evidenence for the existence of neutrinos, first given in 1956 at the Savannah River Nuclear Power Plant. Indeed, there is now a "neutrino observatory" at Sudbury, England that regularly detects neutrinos in cosmic rays.
 
I guess by evidence, I mean how would a scientist explain to someone who has never heard of neutrinos, and had only ever leaned about simpler atomic structure, how we know they are there. I have done some reading into a few experiments carried out but I am more interested in the theory, or in other words why someone would think that there had to be something else other than a beta emission and the recoil nucleus in the first place.

I'm not sure what you mean by "At the elementary particle level, there is no "conservation of energy". There is 'conservation of energy/mass'." could you please explain that a bit more.

Thanks for the response.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by "At the elementary particle level, there is no "conservation of energy". There is 'conservation of energy/mass'." could you please explain that a bit more.

Einstein showed that mass and energy are two different manifestations of the same basic "thing", which is here called mass/energy. In nuclear reactions mass as defined in classical physics, can be transformed to energy (as defined in classical physics).

Trivially, you can think of mass as a "form" on energy.
 
Moridin said:
Einstein showed that mass and energy are two different manifestations of the same basic "thing", which is here called mass/energy. In nuclear reactions mass as defined in classical physics, can be transformed to energy (as defined in classical physics).

Trivially, you can think of mass as a "form" on energy.

Going a bit off topic here, is this why people would say that a photon is massless as it has no energy or infact could be said to be, so therefor is able to travel at the speed of light?

Ok back on topic, thank you very much, that has cleared that up.

Any other "evidence" would be most apreciated.
 
_Mayday_ said:
Going a bit off topic here, is this why people would say that a photon is massless as it has no energy or infact could be said to be, so therefor is able to travel at the speed of light?

Ok back on topic, thank you very much, that has cleared that up.

Any other "evidence" would be most apreciated.
No, a photon has no such thing as 'invariant mass' (as in a "mass" that everyone will observe regardless of their own conditions - hence unchanging) which is why it's called 'massless'.
 
Ah, ok thanks for clearing that up.Would I be correct in saying I have most the evidence then?
 
I would have thought conservation of momentum is more than enough?
 

Similar threads

High School What do we know about neutrino-neutrino scattering?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Undergrad Majorana Neutrinos: Evidence of Particle vs. Antiparticle?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad New Upper Bound of Neutrino Mass
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Undergrad New ultra-high energy Neutrino
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Graduate A liquid crystal of Potassium-42 Chloride for directional neutrino detection
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad T2K sees ~3 sigma evidence for neutrino CP violation
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K
Undergrad What happens when two Neutrinos collide?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
High School Formula for neutrinos emitted per second from a Proto Neutron Star
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate Atmospheric electron neutrinos
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Where are these neutrino masses coming from?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K