How To See Black Holes By Catching Neutrinos

[@pbsspacetime]

Don't forget to check out PIA's special Black Friday deal for Space Time fans www.piavpn.com/SpaceTime

[@meleardil]

I was a member (for 3 years) of the Bajkal lake Neutrino telescope team (it was NT-200 at that time). I wrote my masters on that project. I was on the Ice 3 times. I wanted to go to Antarctica (the project was named Amanda at that time), but I did not succeed.

[@brothermine2292]

How can a VPN customer be certain that the VPN company isn't spying on the customer's internet data? Or at least the metadata.

[@memyshelfandeye318]

​@@brothermine2292 US company. They are required by law to spy on their customers because "Security at home".

[@mangethegamer]

If God actually wanted his children to see black holes he would have made them visible.

[@ltloxa1159]

The visuals at 11:57 sugests a (10km)^3 cube rather than a 10km^3 cube.

[@lisajsch1338]

So cool to have our work featured in PBS space time! We're doing our best to make these first steps of neutrino astronomy possible. And there are more detectors being built and planned! Just one criticism: the neutrino map you showed is an older one, the new one with 4.2 sigma significance is available in Science and also on ArXiv by now.

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

Thank you for you work!

[@housellama]

This is super cool. Having the third leg of multi-messenger astronomy finally up and producing results is so great to hear! Congrats on the work and having your paper up on ArXiv!

[@monkeeseemonkeedoo3745]

Yay!

[@MrGaborKukucska]

Amazing work chasing this elusive particle.

[@sonicgravitypodcast4436]

Thank you so much for your work--it's amazing! I'm so intrigued by this. I have a couple questions. Is M-77 a spiral galaxy that is orthogonal to our line of sight? I have this conjecture that black holes are donuts and space-time blows out of their surface area, so if we are looking right down the barrel of the M-77 donut hole and we're getting extra neutrinos that might be the space accelerated through the donut hole axis; also, I have a hard time accepting that neutrinos just turn into muons and tau elementary particles (just seems like we're saying it's magic--the fundamental quantum spin and charge changes are "no big deal" because it's magic). If we hypothesized that if the neutrino was the moving "quantization grid paper" of spacetime and neutrinos move through everything (space could be moving through us the way time moves through us if we believe we're in a holographic universe on the surface of the black hole), that also means neutrinos could go faster than light (if they were space-time not energy particles), and if neutrinos were markers for quantized space moving faster than light through the detector, it would definitely create sonic booms as the field values of that faster than light moving quantized space changed faster than a wave could propagate through stationary space. I guess it comes down to this. Are we seeing 1 in every 10M neutrinos hitting in a statistical rhythm where individual high energy particles hitting and being detected, or are we seeing massive unmistakable swaths and surges of detections as (perhaps) much higher density flows of space surged through the detector (like big rivers of detection density being set off that would almost appear like the entire detector was moving through)? Did any unusual detection patterns arise? If this were true, then GRB 221009A, the GRB that hit us in October this year, (data taken later than that time) would need to show a sustained high concentration of neutrinos like M-77, because the the star's supernova (and black hole donut) would need to be pointing right at us. Does the post GRB 221009A sky data show the black hole origin of GRB 221009A, also has unusually high concentration of neutrinos pointing at us? Thank you so much for sharing your work!

[@spacetime3]

Another quality rabbit hole to go down! It's amazing how much the quality of physics content the public has nowadays still remember the days of dumbed down physics content. Love this channel!

[@tomdodson6293]

Syntax error

[@ignaciomoreno9655]

Too much rabit holes, too little time.

[@tinygriffy]

"quality rabbit hole" lol ! like in nice wooden floor, rgb ceiling lightning and polished brass door knobs ? can't wait to see the bunny that lives here ;)

[@PetraKann]

The period we are living in is not a golden age of Physics. In fact Physics has been near stagnant since the mid 1970s with just a handful of exceptions. Dont let the glitter blind you from the rotting stench beneath

[@SteedRuckus]

I'm kind of a connoisseur of all types of quality holes

[@AlyxBowen]

As a science enthusiast and former Antarctican I’m happy to see IceCube being celebrated on SpaceTime. I worked on the observatory communications lines to the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station and it will always be a career highlight for me. Thank you SpaceTime.

[@pneuma23093]

Thank you for your service sir

[@KuK137]

@@pneuma23093 And this, unlike your standard 80 IQ war criminals, aka army, is actually service worth celebrating...

[@GunthJuh]

Thank you kind sir for your work down there ! it looks like a very impressive thing ! I wish I could go visit the Amundsen-Scott base but my field of activity will never send me there. I only discovered it through BBC documentaries and it is really an impressive feat !

[@markzambelli]

Matt O'Dowd is a Legend. There are so many hard-working people that make this channel great, a few of which we see mentioned in the credits. Yet atop this pyramid of talent stands Matt, the very face of PBS Space Time... whether he's clarifying pronunciations or detailing the latest research in the subject of the day he does so with that wry Aussie humour that's so infectious and such a pleasure to see. Good on ya' mate... bloody Legend!

[@TerenceClark]

I love that a project my local university, UW Madison, is so involved with! My ex was on the local neutrino detector team for the project next door, CUORE, which got a call out on a prior episode. It's awesome knowing so much cutting edge physics is happening right down the road, quite literally.

[@Astronomater]

as a doc, i agree that someone seeing flashes of light should see a doc immediately. worst case scenario is that it is a detached retina. most likely cause is likely a migraine aura but if it persists or happens repeatedly, it definitely isn't a neutrino.

[@sagnorm1863]

So you are saying that the neutrino map of the sky I created based off of the flashes in my eyes is not reliable?

[@semaj_5022]

The calculation of likelihood of seeing a neutrino at the end was honestly one of my favorite parts of this video. I wonder if there's a way to include more of those sorts of "real world" math problems in future videos? That kind of stuff is so cool to me.

[@DMBHomes]

I find your content so relaxing to listen to that I never get past 60% without dozing off. I have to watch a few times to get through it. I’m not saying it’s boring , I think my mind just wanders into physics imagination combined with your soothing voice and I’m asleep. Love it and keep up the great work. Thank you.

[@ekkehard8]

Wouldn't it be by a factor of 1000? Each particle passing through is 10 times as likely to be detected, but there should also be 100 times as many particles we have the chance to detect since the "area" they see is 100 times greater?

[@chrisriess1298]

I was thinking the same thing...

[@jenmacallister9379]

The ice sheet Ice Cube Observatory sits on is only 9300' (2.8 km) deep. The same as the elevation of the South Pole Station. So you are not going to get a 10km x 10km x 10km square cube piece of ice. (The image in the video of a 10km cube would not be correct.) BTW it is all move about 10m a year toward South America so in about 300,000 years is will be falling in the South Pacific. If of course it doesn't melt faster.

[@janfranz5993]

I was initially thinking the same, but then I realised that 10km^3 is not 10km * 10km * 10km. That would be 1000km^3.... A 10km^3 cube would "only" have a length of roughly 2.15km

[@npip99]

Should be a factor of 100. 10km x 10km. It can still only be 1km deep.

[@dugldoo]

He said "10 cubic kms" not "'10 kms cubed"'. So his statement of a factor of 10 is correct. The illustration is wrong.

[@Bhenderson0001]

I learn so much from these videos, they do not go too technical but do not treat you like a simpleton either. Its great to enjoy these subjects again as I used to enjoy them a lot just after I left college. If I could contribute I would, but unfortunatly I work with sick pigeons and there are lots of them and I am the only one buying the medicine. If I ever get a bit richer, you can be sure I will give some payback, in the meantime thank you for being so generous with these videos and the work that goes into them. Thank you.

[@peterbeninger7068]

Um, pigeons don't seem to be endangered, I presume you just want to relieve some of the suffering in this world?

[@theweapi]

11:55 Ten cubic kilometers has a diameter of the cube root of 10 (2.154 km), not 10 km diameter (which would be a thousand cubic kilometers).

[@TheeBohemian]

Thank you Captain Pedantic!🦤

[@eljcd]

Indeed. I found weird that the Antarctica crust ice was ten km deep, this sounds more reasonable.

[@jenmacallister9379]

@@eljcd The ice sheet Ice Cube Observatory sits on is only 9300' (2.8 km) deep. The same as the elevation of the South Pole Station. The image in the video of a 10km cube would not be correct.

[@youstandcorrected]

Don't know how many years I've followed SpaceTime by now... but thank you! P.S. Please never remove the ambient music (end of the episode) from your shows. I adore it.

[@jado5705]

Matt. You are a cosmic legend in the vast emptiness of this space.

[@hoola_amigos]

Are you saying he's boring? 🤷‍♂️

[@amiththomas3884]

*in the vast emptiness, of space time.

[@GREGGRCO]

At 14 minutes in: Matt, does this count towards neutrino detection?? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_visual_phenomena#:~:text=Cosmic%20ray%20visual%20phenomena%2C%20or,as%20during%20the%20Apollo%20program.

[@qwerty_and_azerty]

This is probably in my top 5 favourite Space Time episodes ever! Thanks for all your hard work producing such great content 🎉

[@weksauce]

IMPORTANT PSA: If you think you've detected Cherenkov radiation in your eye, and it's peripheral, it's FAR more likely (almost certain) that you're just having vitreal detachment, which is a normal aging process. Get it checked anyway, because there is concern of retinal detachment, but that complication is rare (way less rare than detecting Cherenkov radiation though!).

[@censoredopinions]

True! I have to explain that constantly to patients. Would you by chance be in ophthalmology too? We have to explain flashes and floaters constantly, and ensure patients they do not have a tumor when they see scintillations from ophthalmic migraine. That makes up a surprising amount of my day.

[@Dragrath1]

Yeah good point on Earth the likelihood of such a detection being Cherenkov radiation is pretty low though that might not be a wise assumption in low Earth orbit or near an active nuclear reactor....(*In which case you should look to get into a more radiation shielded environment ASAP.

[@EnglishMike]

I thought someone was playing with a laser pointer nearby when it first happened to me. It was just bog standard vitreal detachment -- getting old...

[@Kelnx]

Generally speaking in my years working in the nuclear field (particularly with nuclear materials), if we saw any sort of "blue flash", it would mean very very bad things.

[@weksauce]

@@censoredopinions I'm not in ophthalmology.

[@defeatSpace]

The Ice Cube array gives me chills of awe.

[@tinygriffy]

first I was thinking of beavers, then of a nice Bourbon .. strange.

[@weathercat4]

It feels like we are entering a completely new age of cosmic discovery!

[@ruintheliarsschemes]

Yes it may feel that way but in truth the west is entering a time of diminishing power.

[@2Glock30s]

I think you are right! It is so exciting too, just sit back and enjoy all the new discoveries!

[@LuisSierra42]

soon the simulation is going to be destroyed

[@xploration1437]

@@LuisSierra42 nah

[@spindoctor6385]

I would not call it something new, it is just that engineering is slowly making steps to catch up to the theory that has existed for the best part of a century. That does not make it less interesting.

[@_robinmc__-thesteve5380]

WHAT A LEGEND THAT'S LEGIT THE BEST WAY TO HONOR A PATREON MEMBER LET'S GO

[@mkjaiswal11]

Hi PBS Space Time, I have a request for a video about a recent experiment in Quantum Gravity. The people at Google and different physicists simulated a quantum version of a wormhole, using entangled pairs of qubits in Google's Quantum Computer. It would be really interesting to see an explanation of their experiment from your team, covering the details about their circuit as it seems like a major achievement for Quantum Gravity. As always, keep making great videos like these. Thank you.

[@jasonrubik]

6:44 I love these videos, and Matt is one of the best voices of sciences these days ! However, the cold iceCube in the hot mantle at 6:44 is a bit funny ! lol

[@seanbrown207]

Wow! How awesome the IceCube Observatory is! I thought it was smaller than described but bristling with sensors. I was wrong. It’s HUGE, AND bristling with sensors 😂 Also. I gotta say! I remember ye olden days of science programming where it was like a couple 60 minute NOVA specials a year and you got the middle school explanation of the science. Now!? Programs like this will give you the more-or-less non-simplified version and they’ll even break out the equations and walk you through it, like a college (or high school) class. And they’ll even delve into the obscure areas of a field and produce many videos a year. What a world we live in! All for free (to the consumer).

[@kwisin1337]

7:18, now thats a proper introduction. Really love how you strive to explain even the smallest detail, to everyone evolved, a Very Big Thank You for your commitment to Quality Work.

[@stathis2037]

At 12:00, if you expand the Ice Cube to 10km³ don't you get an increased detection rate by a factor of 1000? And not 10 as seen in the video?

[@garethdean6382]

There's a few issues. One is that the ice sheet is not 10km deep, it's more like expanding the area a hundredfold. The other issue revolves around how the detectors work. Rather than having 100x more each detecting the same number of neutrinos you end up with multiple detectors seeing the same neutrino.

[@r1nger81]

Fascinating. The suspense and wonder created by the slowly developing images produced by the neutrino detector conveys a sense of childlike curiosity. Working on this project must be quite rewarding!!

[@corrosiongod]

Might be cold and a bit isolated lol. Bring a coat and a teddy bear.

[@Momijigari]

Being fascinated by the construction of this Neutrino Detector using ice and bore holes I attempted to relay the awe I had to my 74 yo mother. The question I got back from her was, "What does this do for us?"

[@jaredprather8060]

Tell her, it makes us wiser

[@Eagle3302PL]

Long term effects of study of any physics including astrophysics is improvements to material science and sensors/detectors. So sure this does nothing for now but down the line this knowledge may help someone discover some new alloy or composite, or the detection methods can be modified to be used in medicine/environmental science.

[@kellymoses8566]

It makes us less ignorant about the universe.

[@d00mf00d]

PBS space time is such a wholesome all around great channel we watch it as a family every new upload!

[@heartofdawn2341]

I'd love to see an episode on strange matter. Also, is charm/top/bottom matter also possible?

[@jefflayton4339]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/q2W1f3qIrt-nZ5I

[@clancyjames585]

Hmmm, probably not, I think strange matter is potentially possible because the strange quark is much lower in mass than the nucleon energy, while charm/top/bottom starts getting pretty heavy and wouldn't be energetically favourable. But yes, strange matter ftw!

[@angelcosta4383]

It is indeed possible, it just decays too fast to make a big enough sample

[@LMarti13]

I had a mini-eureka moment a few minutes in when I realized the basic answer to the title. Very cool!

[@AwakeInAnacortes]

Excellent episode! Always up for a good video about one of my favorite topics: little neutral ones. More neutrinos please. Good stuff! Also, would love to see how neutrino momentum varies by source. Is there a significant difference between the momentum of a solar neutrino vs one with an extrasolar origin? And do neutrinos change mass or momentum when they change flavor? Thanks in advance if you have time to answer!

[@garethdean6382]

Not only are there differences in momentum, but different solar processes produce neutrinos with different (maximum) energies. So, for example, we have confirmed most steps in the p-p fusion chain but are still looking for the rarer, higher energy neutrinos produced by the 'p-e-p process'. Neutrino flavor is a painful thing to think about. Each flavor of neutrino is a mix of three 'pure masses' and the difference in the speed of these massive components is part of what causes them to change flavors. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino#Flavor,_mass,_and_their_mixing )

[@lisajsch1338]

Since neutrinos are very lightweight, their momentum is basically the same as their energy. And yes: the neutrinos that IceCube detected from NGC 1068 have roughly a million times more energy than solar neutrinos. But there are also (very few) neutrinos with an additional thousand times more energy, we just don't know really where they come from.

[@zacharywong483]

Spectacular video, Spacetime team! Brilliant and understandable explanations, Matt! Beautifully illustrative visuals! And that was a pretty funny mention of Ice Cube a bit after 3:09

[@taliastocks]

Shouldn't a 10km cube increase the sensitivity by 1000x due to 1000x volume? Since a neutrino from a given direction could hit any part of the detector?

[@garethdean6382]

There's a few issues. Firstly the ice is not 10km thick, so it's more like a hundredfold increase in surface area. There's a further reduction based on how the detectors work and the length of the muon light cones. The end result is indeed a roughly 10x increase in detection rather than what you might expect.

[@patrickcoin9457]

Or maybe they made a boo-boo in the graphic at 11:58, showing a 10X10X10 km cube, and Matt states it is 10X the volume, when the cube should have been shown to be only 2.15 km (cube root of 10) on a side That would give a cube of 10 km volume, 10X the current detector, and I'll bet that's what they meant.

[@jasonrubik]

@@patrickcoin9457 Yea, this has to be a goof up in post-production by the editors

[@Robert-qw9hp]

Great tutorial, I can finally see the black holes in my back yard clearly, thank you!

[@hercules71185]

How much would seeing all of these videos and understanding them help with going back to school as an old man? I am inspired to go back but I've never enjoyed school when I was younger.

[@gasdive]

School still teaches the Bohr Atom, so I'd say "not much"

[@michaelsommers2356]

@@gasdive The Bohr atom is pedagogically useful. No one teaches it as the ultimate answer.

[@michaelsommers2356]

Probably not much, though it won't hurt, either. To learn physics for real, you have to do the math. You also don't get to the really cool stuff until grad school. Before that, you have to do the blocks sliding down inclined planes and similar stuff, which isn't as intrinsically interesting, although you do need to understand it to have a hope of understanding the really interesting stuff. The Open Yale Courses channel on YT has the lectures for a year-long intro physics course called, I think, Fundamentals of Physics, taught by Ramamurti Shankar. Why not watch those to see how you like real physics?

[@gasdive]

@@michaelsommers2356 as pedagogically useful as teaching Scripture or learning to recite the Koran. Something easy to teach, easy to test, easy to mark and of no actual use. You might also be surpised to see how many teachers fail to mention that it's not correct, and do in fact teach it as "this is what atoms are"

[@tinygriffy]

@@gasdive ahh, good old times... I wonder what they teach in a hundred years from now.. maybe they laugh about QED QCD QLG and such things and "how wrong they were back then in 2022" .. "branes .. wtf.. roflmao! "

[@SergeiKotikov]

Heyy! It's BTA at 14:02! I was there last year - lived in that little square building with a yellow roof. Fascinating observatory!

[@ChavisvonBradfordscience]

A video on the potential for detecting the cosmic neutrino background with laser interferometers would be interesting to watch. We might be able to learn more about what happened about a second after the Big Bang by studying the cosmic neutrino background.

[@richardsrichards2984]

i dont see the connection btn lasers and neutrinos...maybe you mean gravitational waves...

[@Kartoffelmeister89]

@@richardsrichards2984 gravitational waves are measured with laser interferometers. Meant to reply to above you

[@ChavisvonBradfordscience]

@@richardsrichards2984 While I find instruments like the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, deci-hertz interferometer gravitational wave observatory, and projected Gravitational-wave Lunar Observatory more interesting and compelling, I was referring to a whole other concept. The proposed apparatus was based on research from Taiwan's National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu, and France's Université Paris Diderot. They proposed an interferometer that might also serve as a dark matter detector in the sub-MeV range, which is now outside the reach of direct detection restrictions. The earth's travel through this neutrino bath exerts a force on a pendulum, as if it were exposed to cosmic wind and this could help us detect the cosmic neutrino background.

[@Greippi10]

This is exactly the thing I would like to learn more about too. From my understanding our current technology doesn't permit direct detection of the background, but the indirect method you're referring to sounds very interesting and promising!

[@ShakySpaceYT]

Amazing video as always! Love your stuff. Its the right amount of complexity and explanation! Keep it up :)

[@vasuhooda007]

babe wake up! PBS space time just dropped a new video!!

[@code-dredd]

The next detector should be designed to produce a 100% rate of false positives. It should be called Rick Astley.

[@KendrixTermina]

im particularly excited for the cosmic neutrino background

[@ciCCapROSTi]

I'm sure you got told multiple times already, but 10km^3 and a cube with 10km sides are VERY different volumes.

[@icefreezer7]

I wonder if icecube's scientists are using FFT to split out the signals of the muon signal. This is all so very interesting!

[@kevin42]

Probably

[@ObjectsInMotion]

Almost certainly

[@chrhck]

No, typically "cleaning" the signal involves algorithms that work in time domain and not in frequency domain. This is because muon (or any other netrino-indicuced) signals are not periodic, so you don't gain much by using FFTs

[@ObjectsInMotion]

@@chrhck FFT is not restricted to periodic signals, in fact that's the entire point its a discrete fourier trasnform. We used FFT's all the time, especially for time domain signals because its infinitely easier to do any sort of processing in the frequency domain even if its not the usual high-pass, low-pass sort of filtering. Even just compressing the signal, which they almost certainly do if they're collecting Terrabytes of data per second, requires the use of FFTs. You also are probably going to be sorting out extremely high and low frequency signals, for sure a diurnal signal, so that's why I am 95% sure they are using FFT's for direct signal processing as well on top of the fact they are certainly using it for other things. Remember every time you save a JPEG you are running a FFT.

[@MultiSteveB]

15:19 Nice touch with the waves in the "sea of humanity". :D

[@aberroa1955]

About seeing a neutrino... I once had a bright, though very short burst of light in my right eye. It was way too bright and obvious to write off as a fluke in neurons, and it was just for one moment. Also, I think it may have had some directionality, though probably it's just my brains interpretation, because it was in one eye only, so brain could interpret it as a flash of light from right side. I'm not sure about the color, but it's either white or blue, somewhere in that color region. I though right away that this was a space particle. Maybe it even was a neutrino?

[@tonybarry5101]

Your mention of Ice Cube 2 had me thinking. Wiki thinks the ice in Antarctica near the Cube is about 2.4 km deep. So it will be hard to make a cube with a 10 km height. arXiv suggests the cube 2 might have a volume of 10 km ^3 (which you said) rather than a cube edge of 10 km. Hopefully I get some points for being pedantic ... If not, then no worries, I love PBS Space TIme and keep up the good work.

[@Gaetano.94]

Yay right when I'm ready to eat my home made chocolate croissants. Going to enjoy this episode!😊

[@Tschudenizer]

12:00 Should using a larger Ice Cube going from a cubic length of 1km to 10km (which increases the volume by a factor of 10^3 = 1000) not lead to a better detection rate of a factor of 1000 instead of only a factor of 10? I assume the detection factor should be linear to the volume, not linear to the length of the detector cube. Or am I wrong, if so why?

[@garethdean6382]

The detector's area is being increased 10x, it's NOT going to be a 10km cube (the ice sheet is not nearly that deep for one.) the video illustration is incorrect.

[@DanielSMatthews]

Neutrinos can also be used to detect young civilisations reaching the atomic age as the detonations from the testing and use of nuclear weapons produces a very distinctive pulsed neutrino signal.

[@brothermine2292]

It seems wrong to call those civilizations ”young,” because that might be when those civilizations tend to die. It also seems questionable to say the ones that die were civilized.

[@DanielSMatthews]

@@brothermine2292 That is irrational nonsense, your time of death can be at any age. What point were you trying to make, some form of anti nuclear one?

[@brothermine2292]

@@DanielSMatthews : Not an ”anti nuclear” point. Nuclear war is a serious threat to species survival. Mutual Assured Destruction has worked, so far, to prevent nuclear war, but a single failure would be catastrophic. On the other hand, the fear of escalation to nuclear war has also successfully deterred conventional wars, so I favor treaties that would reduce readiness for conventional sudden attacks before treaties that would prematurely eliminate the fear of escalation to nuclear war. If civilizations tend to die off soon after achieving nuclear capability -- not necessarily death by nuclear catastrophe, merely a strong chronological correlation between the two events -- then it would not be nonsense to call nuclear capability a sign of old age. You haven't justified your use of the word ”young.” Nearly all adjectives & adverbs are misleading false dichotomies used as abbreviations for relative comparison to an unstated alternative, and they can be used manipulatively because people don't all have the same unstated alternative in mind. How are you defining young? In other words, at what point would you say a civilization is no longer young?

[@Eagle3302PL]

Not gonna happen, the sheer neutrino noise from their star would completely drown out any neutrino bursts generated by a civilization.

[@DanielSMatthews]

@@Eagle3302PL You do know that there are different types of neutrinos, depending on the source?

[@homerodysseus4203]

So refreshing to see so many people interested in quantum physics! At this time, this video is a mere 5 hours from it's conception. Yet, there are over 67k views and 295 comments

[@dropaq3665]

Cube with the side of 10km, is kind of not 10 Cubic kilometers, you probably know that, right? ;-)

[@isacaaron]

Amazing video! I can't believe I had not heard about the scientific Ice Cube before

[@deusexaethera]

Is the neutronium contained in neutron stars dense enough to stop a large percentage of neutrinos passing through? Or do they worm through even that stuff?

[@monkeeseemonkeedoo3745]

Total guess based on the video. I think so, there would be many collisions of neutrinos with matter within the star, even though any individual collision is very unlikely, the sheer number of neutrinos makes collisions inevitable. The combined effect points radially out, with gravity holding the collapsed core together, while the outward force takes the outer layers with it.

[@deusexaethera]

@@monkeeseemonkeedoo3745 : I was asking about percentages, not absolute numbers of collisions.

[@SamuelTheCoello]

I am finally at the point of being a PBS SpaceTime viewer where with each upload, I have previously seen the previous videos that Matt references. Finally, I do not need to source out to several other videos to put the larger picture together. It’s all piecing together much quicker. Her Einstein would’ve been fond of this channel, I’m sure

[@TucsonDude]

Only if he had Hendrik Lorentz explaining it to him in elementary terms.

[@MacNif]

Best Channel on YT

[@zdhanse]

Drooling 🤤🤤 another lovely cocktail of cutting edge science and story telling (and video) by #PBSSpacetime

[@zirize]

11:56 why 10 times, not 1000 times?

[@garethdean6382]

The detector's volume is increasing to 10 cubic kilometers, NOT a cube 10km a side. The volume is increasing tenfold, not a thousand. The video's illustration is incorrect.

[@zirize]

@@garethdean6382 I see. thank you.

[@KCNusach]

The graphic at 11:55 portrays the upgrade to ice cube as 1000km^3, not "10 cubic km". Stands to reason that it wouldn't scale as a simple cube because of length contraction.

[@KCNusach]

On second thought, length doesn't matter. The number of atoms it traverses in the cube is the same regardless of relativistic distances, so probability of collision shouldn't be affected.

[@seanurquhart3179]

Seeing 2.75m subs to this gives me some small, tiny, shred of hope for humanity. Don't get me wrong, we're still so definitely screwed, but it helps mask it a little. Thank you for inspiring people to learn about the universe. It's deeply appreciated.

[@michaelsommers2356]

_"Don't get me wrong, we're still so definitely screwed, ..."_ That's what people have been saying since our distant ancestors climbed down from the trees.

[@aggonzalezdc]

This project is based at University of Wisconsin Madison! I can't say I had anything to do with IceCube other than having labs in the same building they built the detectors. But they were awesome!

[@TheFutureIsEloi]

I saw a neutrino once. It was playing the keyboards for Hawkwind. I would have thought it strange, but the quark was on bass. I 💖 magic mushrooms.

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Damn I just fell straight in the black hole

[@markhutchison8343]

Love your videos. Keep me interested without melting my brain (OK... It melts my brain a little). Keep up the good work!

[@refathbari5690]

This is amazing. Does this have any relation to the holographic principle by any chance? Perhaps that would reveal more information about black holes?

[@bobbobington5106]

I am thankful for pbs this thanksgiving

[@NeonVisual]

I love private interwebz access

[@dahleno2014]

I love cheese

[@NeonVisual]

@@dahleno2014 mmm internet cheese

[@xgozulx]

the episode was amazing, but i have to point out the animation at 11:30, wow, it was so cool

[@boohbehr]

First?

[@capjus]

The animations are so awesome and the explanations.. this makes the topic so exciting to watch

[@Ardalambdion]

Neutrinos are one of my favourite subjects in science. With photons, we can only look back to about 380 000 years after Big Bang, but if we 'tame' enough neutrinos, we may look even deeper into our past and the far earlier universe.

[@Synthetica9]

12:00 either what you said here or what the image says is misleading: 10 km^3 is not the same as a cube with 10km sides! Instead, it is a cube with 10^(1/3) km sides, or about 2.15km

[@greggweber9967]

2:23 So it has to be very very close to affect anything or be effected by anything?

[@garethdean6382]

Yes, much like gamma rays. But also, even if it's close the interaction is weak.

[@sephirapple7317]

@pbsspacetime the diagram at 11:57 is incorrect: you state that the ice cube is due to be increased to 10 cubic km BUT the diagram shows a side length of 10km. This would mean an increase in volume by a factor of 1000, because 10x10x10=1000 which has 1000 times more volume than 1x1x1 in the first cube. In reality, if the cube is being made 10 times bigger, the new cube should have a side length of approximately 2.154 km, not 10km.

[@sephirapple7317]

Don't mean to criticize you, just noticed that discrepancy and thought I should mention it. I love your videos tho, for the most part there's some real quality information on the channel! Keep up the good work mate!

[@DuckPerc]

Have you considered using a de-esser on that mic? I hadn't noticed it in previous episodes, but you've got some P-oppy P-losives and clicky T-ransients in this one (11:26). Good stuff as always :) cheers!

[@frun]

That's so interesting, it gives hope for the detection of Superbradyons.

[@markhuebner7580]

Thanks! Great perspective on neutrinos and ICE Cube!

[@IAmNumber4000]

4:53 Oh my god the stuff researchers think of, let alone build, is nuts 😂

[@frankharr9466]

That is insanely cool. I'm looking forward to when they can start coming to conclusions.

[@pedrofigueiredo7850]

Pierre and Marie Curie noticed at night in their lab the glow of solutions of radioactive elements. Then came the Theory of Relativity which Cerenkov used to explain that glow. The correct designation of this glow is Curie effect or Curie-Cerenkov effect, not the popular Cerenkov effect.

[@NewMessage]

Seeing things that by definition can't be seen, by catching things that can't be caught. Physics, man... Whew.

[@blankblank4642]

I've had an eye flash while working 100ft underground, it happened about 15years ago, always wondered what it could of been, many thanks.

[@jonatanromanowski9519]

These awesome topics seem to never end!

[@kukulroukul4698]

only the wikipedia page about neutrinos is an efn AAA movie

[@alsmith20000]

11:50, could you explain the graphic/audio description some more please? You say go to 10 cubic km, which makes sense for increasing its detection rate, but the graphic appears to show a 10x10x10 km cube, which would presumably have a 1000x improvement on detection rate.

[@XEinstein]

11:55 a 10 km³ cube of ice will not have sides of 10 km lengths, but sides of 2,16 km.

[@GunthJuh]

Breathtaking video, very high quality content. Must be a wonder to work on such research project !

[@cmuller1441]

11:58 10km^3 is not a cube with 10km sides... (that would make a 1000km^3 cube).

[@Heptizz]

11:33 damn what a satisfying animation

[@jeremybyington]

15:38 😂 Such an important piece of advice

[@anonymoususerinterface]

Hands down the best channel on earth!!!!!!!

[@CarletonTorpin]

I love this video’s Patreon reward/ recognition.

[@crosseyedcat1183]

11:53 As an engineer, I'm a bit confused by this part. Scaling up the side lengths of the cube by 10 makes the volume of a cube 10^3 larger so you'd get 1000 times more detection volume and so intuitively 1000 times more probability of a neutrino collision event. Could you explain to me where this factor of 10 comes from?

[@MartinDxt]

11:50 the cube side length is not 10 km... or at least call it 10km^3... kinda confusing

[@ZiadCharif]

Did my PhD on dark matter detection using neutrino telescopes. I want to add something here that I may or may not have missed. The more energetic the neutrino the more likely it is to interact. As such for these telescopes the neutrinos generated from the Sun are not problematic as they are never detected. There is also an energy cutoff where if the neutrino is energetic enough, it can't pass through earth at all (if my memory doesn't betray me, the energy needs to be over 1 TeV). Also, due to the extreme energies we are looking at, removing atmospheric neutrinos from the data is easily done by rejecting events in the detector that are down-going versus up-going. There is also other experiments doing the same but from the northern hemisphere, like ANTARES and their expansion KM3NET. They are very complimentary, ANTARES/KM3NET have better angular resolution, but ICECUBE is generally more sensitive (this is a very rough simplification and depends on several factors).

[@kukulroukul4698]

there MUST be a neutrino HIGHWAY somewhere around our galaxy ... i wonder what kind of energies would pass thru there

[@Erik-pu4mj]

Learning about Cherenkov radiation made me absolutely giddy. It's physics I more or less understand, but it such a cool case! Honestly, I'll geek out about any photon 'shockwaves,' like the plasma density waves in the early universe. Reminds me how cool physics is, despite the dismal undergraduate experience.

[@markusmaximus629]

I have to be honest, you are so smart, I love listening to you. Thanks for all you hard and excellent work! Nerd Power!

[@JoseCastillo-wx6jd]

Excellent video. Keep the hard work.

[@ShrimplyPibblesJr]

My second favorite Ice Cube collaboration after NWA.

[@chesthairascot3743]

That's blurry? Dude!! I was expecting like 20 pixels for the entire map. I'm blown away that novel observations like this are still possible.

[@kukulroukul4698]

amazing isnt it ? me too :D

[@MCsCreations]

Fascinating stuff indeed. It would be really interesting to build an observatory like that with some shielding... I know, it's never going to be perfect, but we can try... Right?

[@kukulroukul4698]

it will be amazing if we could manipulate them like photons ALL of a sudden no nuclear waste from fision anymore !

[@martynewport]

Excellent. The weirdest part is that I thought of such astronomy just last night and today this video was in my youtube recommendation! The world is very weird place. Actually I thought Neutrinos could reveal dark matter but here discussion is black holes... Brothers!

[@GuidoHaverkort]

11:55 why does it not increase the detection rate by 100? The crossection gets 10² as big right?

[@garethdean6382]

The volume will be increased tenfold to 10km^3, it will NOT be a cube 10km a side. For one thing, we don't have ice anywhere near that deep.

[@Zamicol]

Great episode. Thank you.