Stargazing How big would a neutrino telescope have to be?

AI Thread Summary
The IceCube neutrino detector in Antarctica, measuring a cubic kilometer, has detected only 28 neutrinos from outside the solar system, indicating low resolution. To observe the Cosmic Neutrino Background from the Big Bang, a larger detector array would be necessary, but the relationship between size and resolution is complex. Energy and spatial resolution depend on the detectors' spectral capabilities and the ability to reconstruct neutrino paths using Cherenkov light. Increasing the size of the detector enhances detection probability rather than resolution. For optimal look-back times, pulsar timing arrays may be more effective in detecting gravitational waves from the inflation period.
CosmicVoyager
Messages
164
Reaction score
0
Greetings,

The IceCube neutrino detector array in the antartic is a cubic kilometer and has deceted about 28 neutrinos from outside the solar system. So the resolution is almost nothing.

I am wondering how large a detector array would have to be to serve as a telescope to observe what I am calling the Cosmic Neutrino Background from the big bang so we could see farther back than we can observing the Cosmic Microwave Background.

Thanks
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The neutrino spectrum is difficult to convert into an equivalent optical resolution. It's probably more a case of time than aperture. Neutrino's are more difficult to collect than photons.
 
CosmicVoyager said:
Greetings,

The IceCube neutrino detector array in the antartic is a cubic kilometer and has deceted about 28 neutrinos from outside the solar system. So the resolution is almost nothing.

I am wondering how large a detector array would have to be to serve as a telescope to observe what I am calling the Cosmic Neutrino Background from the big bang so we could see farther back than we can observing the Cosmic Microwave Background.

Thanks

I don't understand this. What "resolution" are you referring to?

The energy resolution depends on the spectral resolution of the detectors. The spatial resolution depends on how well one can reconstruct the path of the neutrino based on the Cherenkov light. The more and smaller the detectors you can surround the ice, the higher the spatial resolution you can detect. The size of the ice isn't the issue, the same way the size of the water tank used in many of these detection isn't an issue as far as resolution is concerned.

The size, however, will increase the detection probability. Maybe you are confusing detection sensitivity with resolution.

Zz.
 
Neutrino cross-sections are extremely energy dependent. IceCube succeeds because it looks for high-energy neutrinos, TeV or greater. The cosmic neutrino background is expected to be about 2 Kelvins, in the micro-eV range.
 
If you want unbeatable look-back times you got to go for pulsar timing arrays, they should be able to directly detect gravitational waves from around inflation.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...

Similar threads

Back
Top