B Speed of neutrinos - latest results?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Neutrinos Speed
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the speed of neutrinos and the historical controversy surrounding their potential to exceed the speed of light, particularly stemming from the OPERA experiment in 2011. A re-analysis in 2012 resolved the initial claims of superluminal neutrinos, establishing that neutrinos travel very close to the speed of light, but no new significant measurements have emerged since then. Participants express frustration over the lack of recent publications confirming current neutrino speed, emphasizing that neutrinos, which are believed to have mass, do not have a single definitive speed. The conversation also highlights the challenges in measuring neutrino speeds due to their weak interactions with matter and the complexities involved in astrophysical observations. Overall, while the OPERA issue is considered resolved, the quest for precise measurements of neutrino properties continues to be a challenging area of research.
  • #31
We have never seen a neutrino from a supernova. We have only seen antineutrinos.

Neutrinos have a short emission time - a time scale of tens of milliseconds. Antineutrinos have a time scale of tens of seconds.

So a nearby galactic supernova would be 1000x better than 1987a? Not exactly - while we know the start time ~1000x better, it would also be ~1000x closer,. so the time difference is ~1000x smaller. And we're right back where we were. Maybe we'll do two or four times better, but not a thousand.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Hornbein said:
Is the idea that the higher energy neutrinos will be faster. Then if we can detect the pulses and the model for timing of the pulse origin is correct we can then calculate the rest mass. I suppose the problem is that at highly relativistic speeds the difference in velocity is tiny. Well, it's not my problem. Let someone else earn their PhD doing this.
The idea is that neutrinos get spewed out in advance of the the explosion itself fully manifesting in a particular pattern, and you need to model the process properly to make meaningful comparisons of different signals arriving from a distant source. You also need to model properly different routes that the neutrino could have taken to get from the source to Earth where it is detected.
 
  • #33
Vanadium 50 said:
We have never seen a neutrino from a supernova. We have only seen antineutrinos.

True but pretty pedantic. Obviously, in this context, one is talking about both neutrino and antineutrino observations when one is talking about what neutrino telescopes on Earth are seeing.

Vanadium 50 said:
Neutrinos have a short emission time - a time scale of tens of milliseconds. Antineutrinos have a time scale of tens of seconds.

So a nearby galactic supernova would be 1000x better than 1987a? Not exactly - while we know the start time ~1000x better, it would also be ~1000x closer,. so the time difference is ~1000x smaller. And we're right back where we were. Maybe we'll do two or four times better, but not a thousand.
This tradeoff is indeed a big deal and creates a sweet spot that is not too near and not too far.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
684
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K