Beam Neutrinos

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

Perhaps you could begin by presenting an argument, rather than feigning ignorance of this entire thread. I have linked to websites for MINOS and SNO, as well as posting my own material from T2K. Which part do you contest and why?

Quote from: Johannes on January 21, 2010, 03:37:04 PM

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

Perhaps you could begin by presenting an argument, rather than feigning ignorance of this entire thread. I have linked to websites for MINOS and SNO, as well as posting my own material from T2K. Which part do you contest and why?

I can second this. One of my housemates is in Engineering Physics and he was telling me about work they do with beam neutronis, so its not just ERTW.

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:42:44 PM

Quote from: Johannes on January 21, 2010, 03:37:04 PM

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

Perhaps you could begin by presenting an argument, rather than feigning ignorance of this entire thread. I have linked to websites for MINOS and SNO, as well as posting my own material from T2K. Which part do you contest and why?

I can second this. One of my housemates is in Engineering Physics and he was telling me about work they do with beam neutronis, so its not just ERTW.

Fizzers are awesome: http://www.engineering.ubc.ca/enph-spider-2008.mov

http://www.nu.to.infn.it/. Short of looking for decaying particles in the cloud chamber i suggested and trusting conservation of momentum, your probably going to need to spend a lot on money to detect them on your own. That link is to a website that I go to when I need to find a paper or some kind of information. Even if you don't get all the science you can look at the number of papers and number of people that have been involved over the years. If nothing else this is will give you an idea as to the size of the conspiracy.

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

Ya, thanks to bowler's link, here are a few places to get started:
4 - Fundamental Papers - Experiment

[4-1]
    Observation of large CP violation in the neutral B meson system, Abe, K. et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 091802, arXiv:hep-ex/0107061.
[4-2]
    Observation of CP violation in the B^0 meson system, Aubert, B. et al. (BABAR), Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 091801, arXiv:hep-ex/0107013.
[4-3]
    Evidence for the 2 \pi decay of the K_2^0 meson, Christenson, J. H., Cronin, J. W., Fitch, V. L., Turlay, R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 138-140.
    Comment: Nobel Prize in Physics 1980.

5 - Experiment

[5-1]
    Measurement of CP violation observables and parameters for the decays B^{ +- } -> D K^{* +- }, B. Aubert (BaBar), Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 092001, arXiv:0909.3981.
[5-2]
    Search for CP violation in semileptonic Bs decays, V. Abazov (D0), arXiv:0904.3907, 2009.
[5-3]
    Improved Measurement of B^+ -> \rho^+\rho^0 and Determination of the CKM Angle \alpha, B. Aubert (BABAR), Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 141802, arXiv:0901.3522.
[5-4]
    Evidence for CP violation in B0->J/Psi pi0 decays, Aubert, B. (BABAR), Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 021801, arXiv:0804.0896.
[5-5]
    Evidence for Direct CP Violation from Dalitz-plot analysis of B+/- -> K+/- pi+/- pi-/+, Aubert, : B. (The BABAR), Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 012004, arXiv:0803.4451.
[5-6]
    Measurement of B_s^0 mixing parameters from the flavor-tagged decay B^0_s -> J/\psi \phi, Abazov, V. M. et al. (D0), Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 241801, arXiv:0802.2255.
[5-7]
    Search for CP Violation in the Decays D0 -> K- K+ and D0 -> pi- pi+, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 061803, arXiv:0709.2715.
[5-8]
    Search for direct CP violating charge asymmetries in K^ +- -> \pi^ +- \pi^+\pi^- and K^ +- -> \pi^ +- \pi^0\pi^0 decays, J.R. Batley et al. (NA48/2), Eur. Phys. J. C52 (2007) 875-891, arXiv:0707.0697.
[5-9]
    Branching fraction and CP-violation charge asymmetry measurements for B-meson decays to eta K+-, etapi+-, eta'K, eta'pi+-, omega K, and omegapi+-, B. Aubert et al. (BABAR), Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 031103, arXiv:0706.3893.
[5-10]
    Measurements of CP-Violating Asymmetries in the Decay B0->K+K-K0, B. Aubert et al. (BABAR), Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 161802, arXiv:0706.3885.
[5-11]
    Measurement of CP-Violating Asymmetries in B0->D(*)+D-, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 071801, arXiv:0705.1190.
[5-12]
    Evidence for CP Violation in B0 -> D+D- Decays, S. Fratina et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 221802, arXiv:hep-ex/0702031.
[5-13]
    Measurement of CP Asymmetry in B0 to Ks pi0 pi0 Decays, BABAR (BABAR), Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 071101, arXiv:hep-ex/0702010.
[5-14]
    Measurement of the B+ -> rho+ pi0 Branching Fraction and Direct CP Asymmetry, BABAR (BABAR), Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 091103, arXiv:hep-ex/0701035.
[5-15]
    Measurement of the Branching Fraction and Time-Dependent CP Asymmetry in the Decay B0->D*+D*-Ks, BABAR (BABAR), Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 091101, arXiv:hep-ex/0608016.
[5-16]
    Updated Measurement of the CKM Angle alpha Using B0->rho+rho- Decays, B. Aubert et al. (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0607098, 2006.
[5-17]
    First observation of quantum interference in the process \phi -> K_S K_L -> \pi^+ \pi^- \pi^+ \pi^- : a test of quantum mechanics and CPT symmetry, KLOE (KLOE), Phys. Lett. B642 (2006) 315-321, arXiv:hep-ex/0607027.
[5-18]
    New CP-violation and preferred-frame tests with polarized electrons, B. R. Heckel et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 021603, arXiv:hep-ph/0606218.
[5-19]
    Measurements of CP Violation in B^0 -> D^{*-}\pi^+ and B^0 -> D^- \pi^+ Decays, Belle Collaboration et al. (BELLE), Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 092003, arXiv:hep-ex/0604013.
[5-20]
    Search for direct CP violation in the decays K^ +- -> 3\pi^ +- , J. R. Batley et al. (NA48/2), Phys. Lett. B634 (2006) 474, arXiv:hep-ex/0602014.
[5-21]
    Measurement of CP Asymmetries for the Decays B+/- -> D0_CP K*+/-, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 071103, arXiv:hep-ex/0507002.
[5-22]
    A direct search for the CP-violating decay Ks->3p^0 with the KLOE detector at DAFNE, KLOE (KLOE), Phys. Lett. B619 (2005) 61, arXiv:hep-ex/0505012.
[5-23]
    Measurement of gamma in B-+ -> D(*)K-+ decays with a Dalitz analysis of D -> K0s pi- pi+, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 121802, arXiv:hep-ex/0504039.
[5-24]
    Evidence for direct CP violation in B0 -> K+ pi- decays, Chao, Y. et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 191802, arXiv:hep-ex/0408100.
    From the abstract: The measured CP violating asymmetry is at 3.9 \sigma level (including systematics).
[5-25]
    Observation of direct CP violation in B0 -> K+ pi- decays, Aubert, B. et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 131801, arXiv:hep-ex/0407057.
    From the abstract: This measurement establishes direct CP violation in the B0 meson system at the level of 4.2 standard deviations.
[5-26]
    Measurement of the Direct CP Asymmetry in b -> s gamma Decays, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 021804, arXiv:hep-ex/0403035.
[5-27]
    Limits on the Decay-Rate Difference of Neutral-B Mesons and on CP, T, and CPT Violation in B0-antiB0 Oscillations, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 012007, arXiv:hep-ex/0403002.
[5-28]
    Measurements of CP-violating Asymmetries in B^{0} -> K_{s}^{0}\pi^{0} Decays, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 131805, arXiv:hep-ex/0403001.
[5-29]
    Limits on the Decay-Rate Difference of Neutral B Mesons and on CP, T, and CPT Violation in B0-B0bar Oscillations, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 181801, arXiv:hep-ex/0311037.
[5-30]
    Measurement of Time-Dependent CP Asymmetries and Constraints on sin(2beta+gamma) with Partial Reconstruction of B0 -> D*-+ pi+- Decays, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 251802, arXiv:hep-ex/0310037.
[5-31]
    Improved Measurement of the Partial-Rate CP Asymmetry in B+ -> K0pi+ and B- -> K0bar pi- Decays, Y. Unno et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 011103, arXiv:hep-ex/0304035.
[5-32]
    Measurement of branching fraction ratios and CP asymmetries in B^{\pm} \to D_{CP}K^{\pm}, S. K. Swain et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 051101, arXiv:hep-ex/0304032.
[5-33]
    First measurement of the T-violating muon polarization in the decay K+ -> mu+ nu gamma, Anisimovsky, V. V., Khotjantsev, A. N., Ivashkin, A. P. (KEK E246), Phys. Lett. B562 (2003) 166, arXiv:hep-ex/0304027.
[5-34]
    Search for D0D0bar Mixing and a Measurement of the Doubly Cabibbo-suppressed Decay Rate in D0 -> K pi Decays, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 171801, arXiv:hep-ex/0304007.
[5-35]
    Measurements of CP-violating Asymmetries and Branching Fractions in B Meson Decays to eta' K, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 161801, arXiv:hep-ex/0303046.
[5-36]
    Measurement of the Branching Fraction and CP-violating Asymmetries in Neutral B Decays to D*+-D-+, B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 221801, arXiv:hep-ex/0303004.
[5-37]
    Apparatus for a Search for T-violating Muon Polarization in Stopped-Kaon Decays, M. Abe et al. (KEK-E246), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 60, arXiv:hep-ex/0302001.
[5-38]
    Evidence for CP-Violating Asymmetries B0->pi+pi- Decays and Constraints on the CKM Angle phi2, K. Abe et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 012001, arXiv:hep-ex/0301032.
[5-39]
    Search for the Electric Dipole Moment of the tau Lepton, Inami, K. (Belle), Phys. Lett. B551 (2003) 16, arXiv:hep-ex/0210066.
[5-40]
    A precision measurement of direct CP violation in the decay of neutral kaons into two pions, Batley, J. R. et al. (NA48), Phys. Lett. B544 (2002) 97-112, arXiv:hep-ex/0208009.
[5-41]
    Measurements of direct CP violation, CPT symmetry, and other parameters in the neutral kaon system, Alavi-Harati, A. et al. (KTeV), Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 012005, arXiv:hep-ex/0208007.
[5-42]
    An Improved Measurement of Mixing-induced CP Violation in the Neutral B Meson System, Abe, K. (Belle), arXiv:hep-ex/0207098, 2002.
[5-43]
    Measurement of the CP-Violating Asymmetry Amplitude sin2beta, Aubert, B. et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 201802, arXiv:hep-ex/0207042.
[5-44]
    Measurement of CP-Violating Parameters in B -> \eta^\prime K Decays, Chen, K. F. et al. (Belle), Phys. Lett. B546 (2002) 196-205, arXiv:hep-ex/0207033.
[5-45]
    Measurement of CP-Violating Asymmetries in B0 -> pi+pi- Decays, K. Abe et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 071801, arXiv:hep-ex/0204002.
[5-46]
    Measurement of the Branching Fraction and CP Content for the Decay B^0 -> D^+ D^-, Aubert, B. et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 061801, arXiv:hep-ex/0203008.

6 - Experiment - Conference Proceedings

[6-1]
    Measurements of CP violation parameters at the NA48 experiment at CERN, Evgueni Goudzovski, arXiv:0812.4820, 2008. PANIC 08, Eilat, Israel, 9-14 Nov 2008.
[6-2]
    Recent Belle results on CP violation, Olsen, Stephen L. (BELLE), Int. J. Mod. Phys. A23 (2008) 3277-3281, arXiv:0712.2353.
[6-3]
    Recent results from the NA48 experiment at CERN: CP violation and CKM parameter Vus, Evgueni Goudzovski, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 110 (2008) 052019, arXiv:0709.3048. 2007 Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics.
[6-4]
    Measurement of Direct CP Asymmetries in Charmless Hadronic B Decays, Emanuele Di Marco, BABAR Collaboration (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0610015, 2006. ICHEP2006.
[6-5]
    Search for CPT and Lorentz Violation in B0-B0bar Oscillations with Inclusive Dilepton Events, BABAR (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0607103, 2006. ICHEP2006.
[6-6]
    Measurements of the CKM angle \beta/\phi_1 at the B Factories, J. Ocariz, BABAR Collaboration, BELLE Collaboration (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0607001, 2006. XLI Rencontres de Moriond - Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theory, La Thuile Italy, March 11-18, 2006.
[6-7]
    New developments in measurements of CP violation, Gabriele Benelli, arXiv:hep-ex/0606052, 2006. Moriond ElectroWeak 2006 Proceedings.
[6-8]
    Sides of "The" Unitarity Triangle: Results from Belle and Babar, K. Kinoshita, Aip Conf. Proc. 815 (2006) 146, arXiv:hep-ex/0510036. XXV Physics in Collision, 6-9 July, 2005, Czech Republic.
[6-9]
    Recent measurements of sin2b at BaBar, Gabriella Sciolla (BABAR), Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 156 (2006) 16, arXiv:hep-ex/0509022. BEAUTY 2005.
[6-10]
    Angles of the CKM Unitarity Triangle Measured at Belle, A. J. Schwartz, arXiv:hep-ex/0508033, 2005. 19th Les Rencontres de Physique de la Vallee d'Aoste.
[6-11]
    Hadronic B and D studies at BABAR, F. Couderc (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0506031, 2005. 40th Rencontres de Moriond QCD 2005.
[6-12]
    Cold-Antimatter Physics, ATHENA (ATHENA), Ric. Sci. 124 (2005) 25, arXiv:hep-ex/0503034. XLIII International Meeting on Nuclear Physics, Bormio (Italy), March 13-20 (2005).
[6-13]
    Hot Topics from Belle, Tim Gershon et al. (the Belle), arXiv:hep-ex/0412001, 2004. FPCP2004, Daegu, Korea.
[6-14]
    Review of Recent BaBar Results, Luca Lista (BaBar), eConf C0409272 (2004) 010, arXiv:hep-ex/0411086. 2nd International Conference in High-Energy Physics: HEP MAD 04, 26 Sep - 4 Oct 2004, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
[6-15]
    CP Violation in b->s Decays and New Physics Phases, Garmash, Alexei (BELLE), Int. J. Mod. Phys. A20 (2005) 3527, arXiv:hep-ex/0411058. DPF2004, Riverside, CA.
[6-16]
    Selected Topics in CP Violation and Weak Decays from BABAR, John J. Back (BABAR), Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 152 (2006) 148, arXiv:hep-ex/0409068. 11th International Conference In Quantum ChromoDynamics (QCD 04), Montpellier, France, 5-9 July 2004.
[6-17]
    Direct CP Violation - Recent Results from Babar, A. Satpathy, arXiv:hep-ex/0409056, 2004. "5th Rencontres Du Vietnam".
[6-18]
    ATHENA - First Production of Cold Antihydrogen and Beyond, ATHENA (ATHENA), arXiv:hep-ex/0409045, 2004. Third Meeting on CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, Bloomington (Indiana), USA, August 2004.
[6-19]
    CP Violation in B Decays and the CKM Matrix, E.O. Olaiya, eConf C0406271 (2004) SUNT06, arXiv:hep-ex/0409041. XXIV Physics in Collisions Conference (PIC04), Boston, USA, June 2004.
[6-20]
    New search for T-violation in the decays of the charged kaon, V. Anisimovsky, A. Ivashkin, Yu. Kudenko (KEK-PS-E246), Phys. Atom. Nucl. 67 (2004) 1989, arXiv:hep-ex/0312006. NANP'03, Dubna, Russia, June 23-28, 2003.
[6-21]
    CP Violation: Recent Results from BABAR, Gautier Hamel De Monchenault (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0305055, 2003. 38th Rencontres De Moriond On Electroweak Interactions And Unified Theories, 15-22 Mar 2003, Les Arcs, France.
[6-22]
    Towards a measurement of \phi_3, S. K. Swain, arXiv:hep-ex/0305026, 2003. XXXVIII Rencontres De Moriond, Electroweak and Unified Theories, Les Arcs, France, March 15-22, 2003.
[6-23]
    Limits on the Lifetime Difference of Neutral B Mesons and on CP, T, and CPT Violation in B0-B0bar Mixing, B. Aubert et al. (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0303043, 2003. XXXVIIIth Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories, 15-22 March 2003, Les Arcs, France.
[6-24]
    Direct CP violation in neutral kaon decays, Wojciech Wislicki (NA48), Pramana 62 (2004) 601, arXiv:hep-ex/0303037. PASCOS 2003 Conference, Mumbai, India, 2-8 Jan 2003.
[6-25]
    Further search for T-violation in the decay K^+ -> pi^0 mu^+ nu, M Abe, M. Aliev, V. Anisimovsky et al. (KEK-E246), Nucl. Phys. A721 (2003) 445, arXiv:hep-ex/0211049. PANIC02, Osaka, Sept 30 - Oct 4, 2002.
[6-26]
    Search for the Electric Dipole Moment of the tau lepton, K. Inami, Belle collaboration (Belle), eConf C0209101 (2002) TU10, arXiv:hep-ex/0210035. Seventh International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics (TAU02), Santa Cruz, Ca, USA, Sept 2002.
[6-27]
    Measurements of time dependent CP asymmetry in B -> VV decays with BELLE, Ryosuke Itoh (BELLE), arXiv:hep-ex/0210025, 2002. ICHEP2002, Amsterdam, Netherland, 24-31 July (2002).
[6-28]
    Results on \sin 2\phi_2 (\alpha) from the B Factories, T. E. Browder, eConf C020620 (2002) THAT02, arXiv:hep-ex/0210012. XXIII Physics in Collision Conference (PIC02) Stanford, CA USA, June 2002.
[6-29]
    CP Violation in Charm, Kevin Stenson, Frascati Phys. Ser. 28 (2002) 353, arXiv:hep-ex/0207035. International workshop on Heavy Quarks and Leptons, 2002.
[6-30]
    Radiative B Decays - an Experimental Overview, Edward H. Thorndike (Cleo), arXiv:hep-ex/0206067, 2002. FPCP, May 16-18, 2002.
[6-31]
    sin2phi_2(alpha)) from Belle, Eunil Won (Belle), arXiv:hep-ex/0206066, 2002. Flavor Physics and CP Violation (FPCP) 16-18 May 2002, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
[6-32]
    Measurements of branching fractions and CP-violating asymmetries in B0 -> pi+pi-, K+pi-, K+K- decays, P.D. Dauncey (BABAR), arXiv:hep-ex/0206064, 2002. FPCP, 16-18 May 2002.
[6-33]
    Producing slow antihydrogen for a test of CPT symmetry with ATHENA, Fujiwara, M. C. et al. (ATHENA), arXiv:nucl-ex/0202020, 2002. International RIKEN Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Exotic Atoms, Shimoda, Japan, 22-26 Apr 2001.

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

What would you consider a proof of the existence of neutrinos?

Quote from: Johannes on January 21, 2010, 03:37:04 PM

Quote from: ERTW on January 21, 2010, 03:11:36 PM

So for the moment, it appears several thousand grad students must be added to the conspiracy. I am starting to see that this conspiracy is more on the scale of what Dino is suggesting over in the General forums. Are there any FET'ers who have a problem with leaving this where it is, or is someone going to jump back into the pool?
Parsec had something going for a while, but I think he got busy with exams and forgot about it.

If there is no rebuttal, perhaps it should be added to the FAQ as an unexplained phenomenon, since others in the future may ask about it.

Maybe, if you could prove neutrinos exist.

What would you consider a proof of the existence of neutrinos?

For context on the following picture, please check out the first few pages of this document:
http://t2k-information.googlegroups.com/web/T2KFGDDAQ_Presentation.pdf?hl=en

I will start with another event display from the T2K ND280, which shows a semi-horizontal beam triggered event with hits in four different types of detectors:

1. Both FGD's, the P0D, the ECal, and one TPC all saw this beam triggered event
2. The angle of the track, the known depth of the ND280, and the fact that the event was beam triggered strongly suggests that it is not a cosmic ray track
3. The beam must travel from the accelerator though ~280m of dirt before reaching the ND280, which in my opinion rules out axial neutrons as the source of the track
4. The ND280 is surrounded by a 0.2T magnet and the track does not noticeably deflect in a particular direction, indicating that the beam is not charged

The above four points indicated that the track is composed of non-charged, weakly (in both senses) interacting particles. Some nice starter evidence that neutrinos exist. More to follow...

And for another source along the same lines:
http://www.physorg.com/news178300806.html
This one is related to the first detection of T2K, in the INGRID sub-detector.

that pic is my background at the moment .

Why are you so interested in seeing a neutrino your eyes only lie to you anyway. It took us hundreds of years too get passed the limits of our eyes and other senses and really understand our universe. Why are you so keen to handicap yourself? The neutrino doesn't have an electric charge so there is no way to 'see' it. The sodium channels in your eye only respond to photons. Does that mean it can't exist? Make the cloud chamber, you may to wait a couple of hours but eventually you will see a muon decay and you can see the kinked track. Then either the neutrino exists or conservation of momentum is part of the conspiracy.

Lol, I'm not even involved in this thread, and just by skimming it, I saw the typical FE response:  Instead of proving themselves right, they use Creative Writing to prove us wrong.

Everything seems to bend in FE theory. The light, the logic, why is it that the Earth has to be so damn flat.

Well, if we think of the Earth in a coordinate system where the planet is round and the trajectory of light and neutrinos (and logic if you like )
 is a straight line, then maybe one can imagine another coordinate system where the Earth is flat. In this system the trajectory of
light and neutrinos isn´t straight anymore.  This means FE´ers are, in their twisted way, right after all!

Quote from: bowler on March 06, 2009, 12:42:58 PM

Everything seems to bend in FE theory. The light, the logic, why is it that the Earth has to be so damn flat.

Well, if we think of the Earth in a coordinate system where the planet is round and the trajectory of light and neutrinos (and logic if you like )
 is a straight line, then maybe one can imagine another coordinate system where the Earth is flat. In this system the trajectory of
light and neutrinos isn´t straight anymore.  This means FE´ers are, in their twisted way, right after all!

That's a nice idea, but:
A. Another coordinate system another coordinate system
B. This means FE´ers are, in their twisted way, right after all!

A does not imply B. Just because someone could possibly construct a coordinate system that fits observations doesn't mean they have. Until they do it does not exist, because a coordinate system is purely an imaginary concept. Nature is nature; physical laws and coordinate systems are in our heads.

A does not imply B.

Actually it does. Since logic is also deranged in this system, all absurd FE claims seem totally logical there.

Quote from: ERTW on January 25, 2010, 09:12:31 AM

A does not imply B.

Actually it does. Since logic is also deranged in this system, all absurd FE claims seem totally logical there.

FET requires that logic be put aside, so within FET this is totally plausible.

Quote from: Triangleman on January 25, 2010, 09:44:15 AM

Quote from: ERTW on January 25, 2010, 09:12:31 AM

A does not imply B.

Actually it does. Since logic is also deranged in this system, all absurd FE claims seem totally logical there.

FET requires that logic be put aside, so within FET this is totally plausible.

I am going to ignore this idea for now since I doubt any serious FE'er would take it up. It is more of a joke than an actual argument.

Quote from: Canadark on January 25, 2010, 11:36:27 AM

Quote from: Triangleman on January 25, 2010, 09:44:15 AM

Quote from: ERTW on January 25, 2010, 09:12:31 AM

A does not imply B.

Actually it does. Since logic is also deranged in this system, all absurd FE claims seem totally logical there.

FET requires that logic be put aside, so within FET this is totally plausible.

I am going to ignore this idea for now since I doubt any serious FE'er would take it up. It is more of a joke than an actual argument.

Yes

I just found out that the previous event displays I posted were with the magnet still open, so my argument about the tracks not being bent by the magnet is on hold until I get some new event displays. Of course, there is a wealth of other information out there about the dozens of other experiments observing neutrinos, however I don't have as direct access to their raw data so I am less likely to post it.
Here is a nice video of them closing the magnet:

ooooo an up to the minute news flash

ooooo an up to the minute news flash

It is exciting stuff!
Either that or I should be very quick to get my conspiracy videos out into the general public.

Seriously I only read my e-mails about 5 mins before that post. Much more quickly and ill start coming here first

Observations:
1. Neutrinos directed with a downward angle at the near detector site (example shown from T2K, but same experiment done with MINOS)
2. Neutrinos observed at far detector site some distance away (300km with T2K, 735km with MINOS)
3. Flight timing achieved by synchronized by atomic clocks in MINOS, and GPS in T2K
4. Neutrino identification made surrounding detectors with magnetic fields and/or burying them in the ground
5. Experiment conducted over long period of time to build statistical evidence against random electrical fluctuations
6. Cosmic rays continuously monitored, observed, and characterized in order to differentiate from beam neutrinos

Result:
Neutrinos are being purposefully emitted, detected traveling at a downward angle into the ground, and then detected some distance away within expected travel time.

Conclusion:
These experiments disprove the hypothesis that the Earth is in a flat planar shape, and agree with the accepted idea that the Earth is a sphere with an approximate radius of ~6350km.

Afterthought:
These experiments were never intended to prove the earth is flat, simply constructed assuming that it was. Their successful operation is evidence of the round earth not dependent on NASA or any other space faring governments. Their success is built on the dedication of the public to natural science, the commitment of various governments and universities, the careful planning of administrators and engineers, the scientific rigor of hundreds of scientists, and the careful analysis of thousands of graduate level physicists. If you want to dismiss that all as conspiracy I can't stop you, but I can guarantee that high energy physics is not a profiting enterprise.

*Applauds and fires party popper*
*Watches Bishop scream and scream and scream until he's sick*
 

Observations:
1. Neutrinos directed with a downward angle at the near detector site (example shown from T2K, but same experiment done with MINOS)
2. Neutrinos observed at far detector site some distance away (300km with T2K, 735km with MINOS)
3. Flight timing achieved by synchronized by atomic clocks in MINOS, and GPS in T2K
4. Neutrino identification made surrounding detectors with magnetic fields and/or burying them in the ground
5. Experiment conducted over long period of time to build statistical evidence against random electrical fluctuations
6. Cosmic rays continuously monitored, observed, and characterized in order to differentiate from beam neutrinos

Result:
Neutrinos are being purposefully emitted, detected traveling at a downward angle into the ground, and then detected some distance away within expected travel time.

Conclusion:
These experiments disprove the hypothesis that the Earth is in a flat planar shape, and agree with the accepted idea that the Earth is a sphere with an approximate radius of ~6350km.

Afterthought:
These experiments were never intended to prove the earth is flat, simply constructed assuming that it was. Their successful operation is evidence of the round earth not dependent on NASA or any other space faring governments. Their success is built on the dedication of the public to natural science, the commitment of various governments and universities, the careful planning of administrators and engineers, the scientific rigor of hundreds of scientists, and the careful analysis of thousands of graduate level physicists. If you want to dismiss that all as conspiracy I can't stop you, but I can guarantee that high energy physics is not a profiting enterprise.

From what I've seen, these neutrinos were shot into the ground a couple degrees below the horizon line to their destination, cutting a slight sliver through the globe earth.

How do we know that the neutrinos didn't spread out from their origin, much like how the beam of a laser pointer spreads when shot over a long distance?

If you've ever seen the dot of a laser pointer 1000+ feet away, it's a huge faded red dot which could easily illuminate the side of a house. The beams of a laser pointer don't travel in exact straight lines, but gradually spread out as they proceed.

If the neutrinos were spreading out, as they easily could and probably would, it's not at all conclusive that they were traveling into the earth.

Quote from: ERTW on January 29, 2010, 09:12:59 AM

Observations:
1. Neutrinos directed with a downward angle at the near detector site (example shown from T2K, but same experiment done with MINOS)
2. Neutrinos observed at far detector site some distance away (300km with T2K, 735km with MINOS)
3. Flight timing achieved by synchronized by atomic clocks in MINOS, and GPS in T2K
4. Neutrino identification made surrounding detectors with magnetic fields and/or burying them in the ground
5. Experiment conducted over long period of time to build statistical evidence against random electrical fluctuations
6. Cosmic rays continuously monitored, observed, and characterized in order to differentiate from beam neutrinos

Result:
Neutrinos are being purposefully emitted, detected traveling at a downward angle into the ground, and then detected some distance away within expected travel time.

Conclusion:
These experiments disprove the hypothesis that the Earth is in a flat planar shape, and agree with the accepted idea that the Earth is a sphere with an approximate radius of ~6350km.

Afterthought:
These experiments were never intended to prove the earth is flat, simply constructed assuming that it was. Their successful operation is evidence of the round earth not dependent on NASA or any other space faring governments. Their success is built on the dedication of the public to natural science, the commitment of various governments and universities, the careful planning of administrators and engineers, the scientific rigor of hundreds of scientists, and the careful analysis of thousands of graduate level physicists. If you want to dismiss that all as conspiracy I can't stop you, but I can guarantee that high energy physics is not a profiting enterprise.

From what I've seen, these neutrinos were shot into the ground a couple degrees below the horizon line to their destination, cutting a slight sliver through the globe earth.

How do we know that the neutrinos didn't spread out from their origin, much like how the beam of a laser pointer spreads when shot over a long distance?

If you've ever seen the dot of a laser pointer 1000+ feet away, it's a huge faded red dot which could easily illuminate the side of a house. The beams of a laser pointer don't travel in exact straight lines, but gradually spread out as they proceed.

If the neutrinos were spreading out, as they easily could and probably would, it's not at all conclusive that they were traveling into the earth.

The energy spectrum of the neutrino is a very strong function of the angle of emission. We can easily tell the difference between a couple of degrees. Infact the T2K experiment is deliberately offset by 2 degrees to make the energy spectrum more favourable for the aims of the experiment. In the case of MINOS the angle of the beam was more than the other experiments as it had a baseline of nearer 1000km. I forget the exact angle but probably greater then 5 degrees. Not that it matters we can easily tell the difference between 1 degree and 0 degrees by the energy spectrum we measure.

The energy spectrum of the neutrino is a very strong function of the angle of emission. We can easily tell the difference between a couple of degrees. Infact the T2K experiment is deliberately offset by 2 degrees to make the energy spectrum more favourable for the aims of the experiment. In the case of MINOS the angle of the beam was more than the other experiments as it had a baseline of nearer 1000km. I forget the exact angle but probably greater then 5 degrees. Not that it matters we can easily tell the difference between 1 degree and 0 degrees by the energy spectrum we measure.

I'm sorry, but how do you shoot out a beam of neutrinos without the beam spreading apart again?

Your quite right the beam sprays all over the place. We confirm the angle by measureing the energy spectrum. As I say this can be done to within a degree. Especially as after 300km the difference between 1 degree and 0 degrees is quite pronounced. The Earths core, the sun, nuclear reactors all give off plenty of neutrinos which can be detected. This entire farce such as it is relies on the Earth being opaque, this isn't the case.

Your quite right the beam sprays all over the place. We confirm the angle by measureing the energy spectrum.

Who's "we"? Are you involved with this experiment? Clearly not

As I say this can be done to within a degree. Especially as after 300km the difference between 1 degree and 0 degrees is quite pronounced. The Earths core, the sun, nuclear reactors all give off plenty of neutrinos which can be detected. This entire farce such as it is relies on the Earth being opaque, this isn't the case.

If the beam of neutrinos is spreading out by a couple degrees, like the beam on a laser pointer, it's hard to say which neutrinos are "correct" and which ones are "incorrect". The intensity of the beam has been spread over its widened area.

Yes I am a neutrino physicist, thats why I started the beam and solar neutrino threads some time ago.

I'm not sure what you mean by correct and incorrect neutrinos. We know where the source is and we can measure the energy spectra there and we know where we are detecting them and we measure them there. We can tell the angle between the beamline and the detector by the energy spectra of the neutrinos. I'm really not sure how to say it any simpler than this, maybe ERTW can have a go.

We can tell the angle between the beamline and the detector by the energy spectra of the neutrinos. I'm really not sure how to say it any simpler than this, maybe ERTW can have a go.

The energy spectra doesn't tell you anything about its angle. Please stop talking nonsense.