Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Neutrino Telescopes may have nothing to see

  1. Nov 2, 2007 #1
    With physicists building big neutrino detectors like IceCube and Anteras astrophysicists
    where hoping for a completely new way of seeing the universe. However the first
    results for neutrino astronomy coming the old Super Kamiokande labs,
    and from around 1500 neutrino in the TeV range, the've found Nothing,
    no point sources, no excess from the Sun, no excess from the galactic
    center, and even no excess from cosmic ray interactions with intersteller
    gas in our spiral arms. The're picture of incoming neutrino directions was pretty much isotropic.

    Now this is not what people where expecting at all, from the using theory of
    WIMPS for dark matter, dark matter anhillation should have left plenty of
    sources in the neutrino sky, especially the sun and galactic center. But
    even without dark matter, there should have been excesses from cosmic
    rays interactions and from pulsars. The null result looks difficult to
    explain, unless neutrino feel some field (like a magnetic field but not the
    usual magnetic field) thats scrambing up the direction they fly in.

    Well i had the idea that neutrinos get a gauge force to themselves
    for while now, so i'm biased and always look for confirmations
    of my idea first in any paper i read, but can
    anyone see any other reason for the null results from SuperK?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 2, 2007 #2

    malawi_glenn

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    that homepage of yours, do you have confirmation about the theoris in like Physical journals and so on?

    The Neutrino flux from SN1987A was recorded, maybe not with IceCube or Amanda, but the processes that, in theory, should produce large fluxes of neutrinos are out there.
     
  4. Nov 2, 2007 #3
    Nothing as yet, trying for a peer reviewed submission to a journal, at the
    moment. Consider it a pre-print from a hopeful outsider.

    Indeed there where, it was about 20 to 26 detected neutrinos worldwide, from 100,000 light years away. But those are a different energy range to the above results, 2-10MeV for the supernova observations, and 1 GeV-1TeV for above SuperK run. Maybe my title should be, Neutrino telescopes may have nothing to see, between supernova events.

    It leaves the question how do the supernova neutrinos get here in a straight line, and none of others do? Maybe the supernova makes enough of a pulse distortation in the field that bends neutrinos for them to get
    a one time free striaght path to travel down.
     
  5. Nov 2, 2007 #4

    malawi_glenn

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Who said that the neutrinos from SN1987A travelled a straight line?

    This supernova is the closest core collapse supernova this century, thats why we could register neutrinos from it.. And there are other events that we could register neutrinos from: AGN and GRO. And there are other techinques developing: aucostic and radio telescopes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2007
  6. Nov 2, 2007 #5
     
  7. Nov 2, 2007 #6

    malawi_glenn

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    According to models of how supernovas are formed, the large neutrino flux is emitted a time before the light is..

    And a star 100 000 Ly from us is regared as a point source.

    "It leaves the question how do the supernova neutrinos get here in a straight line, and none of others do? Maybe the supernova makes enough of a pulse distortation in the field that bends neutrinos for them to get
    a one time free striaght path to travel down"

    Is just nothing that a mere misunderstanding how isotropic sources far far away are seen from earth i belive.

    http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/StarDeath/sn1987a.html

    And wasn't Super Kamiokande starting operating at 1996?..
     
  8. Nov 2, 2007 #7
    you might be right be right, but only if, the major sources of GeV neutrinos are only extra galactic - active galaxy nuclei and gamma ray bursters. For everything else, some anisotropicy ought to have turned up in that many
    events.
     
  9. Nov 2, 2007 #8

    malawi_glenn

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I have done Neutrino astrophysics courses. And yes, major neutrino high energy sources are AGN and GR bursts.

    Pretty odd that you didnt comment on my comment that is was no strange at all that Super-K did not see neutrinos from SN1987A, it wasn't even built then...

    If you haven't done that yet, try posting your new theory/paper in the "Beyond the standard model". People there know alot more about particle physics than I do and people that hang around in this subforum.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2007
  10. Nov 5, 2007 #9
    Thanks for you vote of interest, actually new theories belong in the
    independent research forum, but since the moderators there hasn't logged in
    for over two months, i'll post it to the beyond standard model forum.
     
  11. Nov 6, 2007 #10
    Thanks for that link by the way, your timing was impeccable as this paper relates to another conversation I'm currently involved in. I'll be reading that paper for awhile. :)

    I'm a bit puzzled here by your suggestion that they found "nothing". The fact they didn't find point sources in the dataset is just as noteworthy and interesting as finding point sources in the dataset, particularly as it relates to WIMP theories, and solar theories, etc. That lack of finding point sources is a "finding" in and of itself.

    Yes, and they didn't find any evidence of a WIMP destruction point sources in the earth, the sun, or the galactic core. That would tend to falsify, or at least throw a very wet blanket on WIMP annihilation theories.

    Well, I can think of several possible reasons off the top of my head. The most obvious reasons is that their detector may simply require a much longer sampling of data because of it's very low neutrino detection rate. It could also be that WIMPS simply don't exist, or are not annihilated by objects in our solar system or galaxy. It seems that most of these high energy neutrinos hits come from unidentified sources and did not come from the objects being studied. Even without obvious point sources in the dataset, I would still love to see very high resolution neutrino images of the universe. These types of data sets are extremely useful even if the results are hard to explain.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Neutrino Telescopes may have nothing to see
  1. Neutrino Telescopes (Replies: 1)

Loading...