Author Topic: Table top neutrino detector possible?  (Read 4121 times)

Offline momerathe

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #20 on: 11/12/2016 07:53 AM »
well if these papers are legit (and that seems to be a big if) then you should be able to build a "box" with one open end that blocks enough neutrinos to be able to distinguish the ones coming in from the open end of the box. (I think.)

Where are you getting that from?
thermodynamics will get you in the end

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 740
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #21 on: 11/12/2016 08:46 AM »
well if these papers are legit (and that seems to be a big if) then you should be able to build a "box" with one open end that blocks enough neutrinos to be able to distinguish the ones coming in from the open end of the box. (I think.)

Where are you getting that from?

Well, IF these results are to be believed, 32Si has an absolutely astonishing neutrino interaction cross section. So just use 32Si to make the walls of the box (you may also want to add a layer of lead to keep the stuff from decay 32Si away, but that does nothing to neutrinos). Then have another unshielded (by 32Si, you can encase it in lead if you want) clump of 32Si as your detector.

Offline momerathe

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #22 on: 11/14/2016 07:24 AM »
well if these papers are legit (and that seems to be a big if) then you should be able to build a "box" with one open end that blocks enough neutrinos to be able to distinguish the ones coming in from the open end of the box. (I think.)

Where are you getting that from?

Well, IF these results are to be believed, 32Si has an absolutely astonishing neutrino interaction cross section. So just use 32Si to make the walls of the box (you may also want to add a layer of lead to keep the stuff from decay 32Si away, but that does nothing to neutrinos). Then have another unshielded (by 32Si, you can encase it in lead if you want) clump of 32Si as your detector.

In relative terms, maybe. But we're talking about a fractional increase in decay rate, in the face of a truly enormous solar neutrino flux (something like 10^10/cm^2). And even then, the neutrinos are unlikely to be absorbed or scattered through large angles, because then the energy transferred to the decay products would be far more diagnostic - that's why we can detect them with Cherenkov light. The idea that this process is "blocking" neutrinos is way out there.

thermodynamics will get you in the end

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 740
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #23 on: 11/14/2016 12:45 PM »
In relative terms, maybe. But we're talking about a fractional increase in decay rate, in the face of a truly enormous solar neutrino flux (something like 10^10/cm^2). And even then, the neutrinos are unlikely to be absorbed or scattered through large angles, because then the energy transferred to the decay products would be far more diagnostic - that's why we can detect them with Cherenkov light. The idea that this process is "blocking" neutrinos is way out there.

Oh, yes, I agree. There's a big, big IF, or rather a series of big IFs. BTW, I must say I liked figure 1 of the Solar Physics article. I think it sums up everything quite nicely.

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 565
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #24 on: 11/14/2016 03:11 PM »
A table top detector is a bit more convenient than the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory located a few hours North of my house.
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory.  Its detector is located in an Inco mine about 2100m/6890 feet underground. Its detector capsule is acrylic and measures 12m/40ft in diameter and contains 1000 tonnes of Deuterium Oxide(D2O aka Heavy Water) worth CAN$330,000,00, which was supplied at no cost by Atomic Energy of Canada as they keep large reserves of heavy water for our CANDU reactor systems.
The capsule is "floated" in conventional H2O (Water) which provides additional radiation shielding.The heavy water was viewed by approximately 9,600 photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) mounted on a geodesic sphere at a radius of about 850cm/35".  The cavity which houses the detector was the largest in the world at such a depth, requiring a variety of high-performance rock bolting techniques to prevent rock bursts.

http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/

On 18 June 2001, the first scientific results of SNO were published bringing the first clear evidence that neutrinos oscillate (i.e. that they can transmute into one another), as they travel in the sun. This oscillation in turn implies that neutrinos have non-zero masses. The total flux of all neutrino flavours measured by SNO agrees well with the theoretical prediction. Further measurements carried out by SNO have since confirmed and improved the precision of the original result.

Although Super-K (Super-Kamioka Neutrino Detection Experiment) in Japan, had beaten SNO to the punch, having published evidence for neutrino oscillation as early as 1998, the Super-K results were not conclusive and did not specifically deal with solar neutrinos. SNO's results were the first to directly demonstrate oscillations in solar neutrinos. This was important to the standard solar model. The results of the experiment had a major impact on the field, as evidenced by the fact that two of the SNO papers have been cited over 1,500 times, and two others have been cited over 750 times.

In 2007, the Franklin Institute awarded the director of SNO Art McDonald with the Benjamin Franklin Medal in Physics. In 2015 the Nobel Prize for Physics was awarded to Arthur B. McDonald and Takaaki Kajita for the discovery of neutrino masses.

Pictures:
1) the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory detector installed underground
2) The Higg's Event from CERN
3) Arthur B McDonald
4) Takaaki Kajita
Paul

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 700
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #25 on: 11/14/2016 03:56 PM »
http://phys.org/news/2016-11-solar-physicists-easier-peculiar-particles.html

if this is real then (eventually) why not a high resolution neutrino "camera?" one that would have applications for studying the interiors of planets and stars or used for nuclear treaty verification or targeting a nuke in flight even? i know the neutrino environment is the one with the most noise possible but there could be processing techniques that could filter out all the noise. what if the advancement of technology eventually yields a micro or nano scale detector?


What specifications would you be looking for?


Have you been following the 3D Printing thread?  Only a few items get posted, its wide open.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33141.msg1569436#msg1569436
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Online Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1308
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: Table top neutrino detector possible?
« Reply #26 on: 11/15/2016 02:20 AM »
http://phys.org/news/2016-11-solar-physicists-easier-peculiar-particles.html

if this is real then (eventually) why not a high resolution neutrino "camera?" one that would have applications for studying the interiors of planets and stars or used for nuclear treaty verification or targeting a nuke in flight even? i know the neutrino environment is the one with the most noise possible but there could be processing techniques that could filter out all the noise. what if the advancement of technology eventually yields a micro or nano scale detector?


What specifications would you be looking for?


Have you been following the 3D Printing thread?  Only a few items get posted, its wide open.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33141.msg1569436#msg1569436
the problem is currently there is known combination of ordinary matter that would be suitable. It would require breakthroughs in meta-material, exotic matter (not talking about the usual case of negative mass/energy) or the discovery and exploitation of some otherwise obscure physics effect such as the one in the OP or similar to the Casimir effect or something like that. If it does devolve to exotic matter then it is likely it would be (potentially much) below nanoscale in nature so 3d printing and additive manufacturing are not up to the demands of such stuff yet. It might require pico or femtoscale precision work.
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Online Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1308
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 86
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Tags: