The ghost particle: searching for the mysterious neutrino - with James Riordon

What's the history and science behind the pursuit of the ghostly subatomic particle, the neutrino?
Watch the Q&A (exclusively for channel members) here: • Q&A: The ghost particl...
Buy James's book here: geni.us/h32Bb
This lecture was recorded on 17 August 2023.
With approximately 100 trillion neutrinos passing through us every second, these particles hold the key to unlocking some of the Universe's greatest mysteries. From the discovery of neutrinos and their role in illuminating the Universe through neutrino telescopes to the challenges of detecting this elusive particle, this lecture explores the science behind the ghost particle.
Additionally, we will explore the potential of neutrinos to answer some of the biggest questions in the universe, including the composition of dark matter and the Universe's origin. This is a unique opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the science behind the neutrino and its impact on our understanding of the cosmos.
00:00 A revolution in astronomy
4:58 What exactly is a neutrino?
6:13 Where do neutrinos come from?
8:55 Nils Bohr and the Beta decay conundrum
12:14 Hans Bethe and the invisible particle solution
15:24 How NOT to find a neutrino
21:27 On the hunt for solar neutrinos
25:48 Three flavours of neutrinos
28:16 Neutrino oscillation and how it works
31:18 Probing the inside of the earth
34:47 Using neutrinos for astronomy
38:47 Matter over Antimatter
46:09 Could aliens communicate using neutrinos?
52:50 Looking at the birth of the universe
---
James Riordon is a science journalist who has written for Science News, Scientific American, New Scientist, Popular Science, Washington Post, Science, Ad Astra, Physics Today, and Analytical Chemistry. He is a past President of the DC Science Writers Association and Cofounder of the Southwest Science Writers Association.
---
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @theroyalinstitution
Subscribe for regular science videos: bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
The Ri is on Twitter: / ri_science
and Facebook: / royalinstitution
and TikTok: / ri_science
Listen to the Ri podcast: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
Donate to the RI and help us bring you more lectures: www.rigb.org/support-us/donat...
Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/editing-ri-talks...
Subscribe for the latest science videos: bit.ly/RiNewsletter
Product links on this page may be affiliate links which means it won't cost you any extra but we may earn a small commission if you decide to purchase through the link.

[@Vazmenko]

Outstanding lecture for "only a journalist". Thank you Sir!

[@michaelc.tiberio5761]

I am saddened that the lecture Q&A videos have moved behind a pay wall. It seems counter to the RI mission of "connecting as many people as possible with the world of science." I hope they will reconsider.

[@SuperBlinding]

I am in complete agreement with you on that ~ ~ I too hope that they reconsider.

[@keep-ukraine-free528]

This decision is contrary to the RI's mission. They will lose viewers.

[@sacredweeds]

I remember when RI didn’t have ads as well. 😢

[@michaelc.tiberio5761]

I don't mind the ads, I think donating a few seconds of my attention in exchange for a little money flowing to the RI is a good trade. But effectively blocking access to a part of the lecture experience feels contrary to RI principles. I love the work they do. I hope they can find a better way.

[@michaelc.tiberio5761]

Let's see if we can make a version of this comment the top voted comment on each video. Perhaps someone will notice.

[@keep-ukraine-free528]

A superb talk on a topic very rarely discussed with the public. Lucidly explained, with engaging examples - e.g. of neutrino oscillations. Much thanks to James Riordon and RI.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

It was my pleasure. That is such an amazing and historic venue. To stand where so many brilliant people have stood was humbling

[@keep-ukraine-free528]

@@jamesrriordon5955 Your talk opened my already wide-open eyes, to even more complexity. Rhetorically, I wonder: If/since neutrinos seem to oscillate between their 3 flavors (and between their lepton/antilepton states), does it suggest all leptons oscillate within their species? Related is the idea of baryons probabilistically oscillating between particle/antiparticle forms (and between 3 or more odd-count multiples of quarks), creating the "quantum foam" we call "empty" space. _Combining both:_ As a lepton traverses "empty" space, does it/how does it perturb the quasi-particles in the quantum foam?

[@alquinn8576]

the bolo tie is 🔥

[@lawrencegoldworm]

Mr. Riordan talk is very elucidating. I learned a lot about the possibilities for exploration of the universe that neutrinos may provide. Thank you!

[@epleace]

Beautifully presented, sir. You have a gift for explaining difficult stuff. Thank you.

[@karloslim]

Great talk on these mysterious particles. Neutrino astronomy has huge potential to tell us things that light simply cant. Exciting stuff

[@cincinnatibrutality0201]

In what way?

[@richard169]

What a fresh, engaging speaker!

[@jorymil]

The central idea of Andy Weir's _Project Hail Mary_ depends on neutrinos being their own antiparticle. Very cool.

[@psyboyo]

I thought it was quite interesting, to watch this lecture, the point of view of a journalist, a man that shows to be very passionate about this like us all. In a way, he mirrors our desire to know more, our, us,we the people that the destiny didn't lead into scientific research, but nevertheless, marvelled by it. Saying this man should never been there, should sadden us all. We love science, seeing this mans passion right there, it could be us, amongst our family and friends. If one spoken word is not accurate, and we know it so, we think to ourselves, that was not accurate, but... realize I knew that! We could be that Man right there, using his passion, to spark ours. Love to all, happy holidays! 😽

[@jamesrriordon5955]

How kind of you! Happy holidays to you too.

[@stevepartridge2959]

Excellent talk. Nice clear presentation.

[@Intervaloverdose]

Excellent, I hung on every word! Now I'm a huge neutrino fan too!! #ScienceCommunicator

[@DeAlpineBro]

Thank you for mentioning Ray Davis and John Bahcall. I saw a documentary on their experiment decades ago and have wondered why they were never mentioned again as neutrino science advanced.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

They were both also really nice people, as well as being great scientists.

[@Pany1Galanis]

I too saw the same docu many years ago and it started me off on keeping in touch with the subject ever since! 🙂

[@nolhoutman]

Thank you !

[@RFC3514]

The real question is: as a neutrino decays, does it turn into an oldtrino?

[@betteroffdead]

😊

[@dembro27]

When a neutrino discovers social media: *radicaltrino*.

[@beeble2003]

No, it turns into a frogrino.

[@johncooper4637]

I really enjoyed going to Homestake Mine Visitors Center in Lead, SD a few weeks ago. They have exhibits about Dr. Davis and the current experiments that are going on in addition to the history of the mine.

[@elinoreberkley1643]

I have a pocket full of neutrinos

[@jamesrriordon5955]

You do!

[@joevostoch8768]

Excellent talk. I bought your book.

[@TheMaxwellee]

Excellent. Thank you.

[@CamiKite]

Very interesting talk! It is fascinating to see that we can already use neutrino not only to see the universe, but also to probe the Earth

[@paskalnovakov1106]

Fantastic lecture. Greetings from 🇧🇬.

[@dr.rakeshkumarmishra8939]

Great analysis of neutrino ❤great lecturer

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it.

[@dr.rakeshkumarmishra8939]

Great lecturer legend science journalist

[@lu-uf8zj]

47:20 - the collapsed detector was at Arecibo in Puerto Rico

[@Rebar77_real]

Neutrinos cause memory bit-flips that cause random glitches in old video games. "Cosmic ray bit flips" is neat reading. Interesting talk!

[@donaldhoot7741]

How could you ever communicate with a system with such high error rates? Only 1 data bit would be detected for every 100,000,000,000 misses? Even just turning off and on ala binary would never work because of missing bits. Great speech.

[@bryandraughn9830]

Fantastic!

[@paullogeman9189]

A clear and comprehensive presentation.

[@JFJ12]

One Alien to the other Alien when looking thru their Neutrino Telescope at the people who constitute the Government of the Most Powerful Country in the History of the World: "Waaa, not's let go there"

[@DimitriDelCastillo]

Great talk! I loved the model you used for Mass States! I feel like I sort of understand things better -- haha. Looking forward to more talks.

[@yuriimarshalofficial]

Neutrino is like cosmic wind, it might bring to us some global information about Universe or even present some epoch

[@alasdairwhyte6616]

what about the neutron decaying is not always at the surface of the atom so resulting in electron having different energies?

[@zyxzevn]

Are neutrinos waves, like photons are EM waves? And how do we know? Note: The neutrino-oscillations seem similar to how light "oscillates" from electric to magnetic and back.

[@S1nwar]

all quantum particles have wave properties. the lighter the more pronounced. wave like behaviour has been observed up to giant C60 molecules showing interference in a double slit experiment

[@zyxzevn]

@@S1nwar I know Quantum-mechanics. But the way neutrons behave, it looks more like another version of light. The neutrino-oscillations are just like EM-waves change from Electric to Magnetic and back.

[@S1nwar]

a photon has both electric field and magnetic field at the same time, perpendicular to each other. they both oscillate at the same time, they dont replace each other.@@zyxzevn

[@filthycasual9381]

Could be longitudinal electrodynamic waves... basically the far-fields of divergent current sources which are omitted by the coloumb guage in classical electrodynamics, and subsequently omitted by quantum electrodynamics through enforcement of the same kind of guage freedom that has been assumed valid in the classical domain. Good luck getting physicists to question maxwellian electrodynamics though.

[@S1nwar]

@@filthycasual9381 wordsalad

[@D1N02]

Obviously neutrinos are a permeating field with very small excitations. It would be useful to look at them like that.

[@melbournewolf]

The Hitchhiker's Guide you the Galaxy; entry: Earth - mostly harmless

[@Leadvest]

What a nice young man.

[@mr88cet]

Great talk, thanks! 1:50 - Interesting that the atomic- and molecular-hydrogen images look so different!

[@samtux762]

Molecular hydrogen line appears in cold molecular clouds. (Otherwise - dissociation). Atomic hydrogen line appears in hot areas of the Milky Way. > then why images are not inverses of each other? Because we project 3d space to 1D map. Along your sight there might be cold and hot objects.

[@mr88cet]

@@samtux762, OK, that sounds plausible. Cool!

[@robertfraser9551]

I think we are all sitting on our hands until a right handed neutrino is found. This could take a while !

[@jerryrowen1]

The very best lecture I've ever heard in my life. Bravo zulu

[@BeIteshazzar]

neutrinos interact with electrons.. speed up the electron so that it becomes a muon.. some of the energy is stored as neutrinos.. we could call it neutrino capture... when the muon decays, it releases those neutrinos..

[@rfvtgbzhn]

39:10-46:10 in theory there could be sections of the universe with matter and other sections with antimatter, with empty space in between. And from what I know you can't distinguish matter and antimatter from afar. In this case we wouldn't observe any annihilation. Or is there a reason to rule that out?

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Very good point! You are correct, matter and antimatter would be difficult to tell distinguish, if they exist in separate parts of the universe and are far enough apart that there is little interaction with the opposite variety. It could certainly solve the matter/antimatter asymmetry problem, if it happens. (Because there would be no asymmetry to explain!) And neutrinos wouldn't need to be involved. Then the big puzzle would be why the matter and antimatter separated. Which would also be exciting to work on!

[@schmetterling4477]

Yes, and now you need an explanation how these large amounts of matter and antimatter got separated so neatly that it didn't leave any x-ray signals at all. ;-)

[@lyledal]

How good are we now at judging the directionality of neutrinos? It seems like 3 or more big detectors could be used to locate the general location of nuclear reactors. Especially reactors that aren't supposed to exist.

[@SheSweetLikSugarNSavage]

Wow.❤loved this. Who's James Riordon again? Thank you very good lecture.. Super informative. And I'm buying that book asap. Putting all other books on full stop.

[@CosmicAliveness]

Super awesome mega like

[@robertnewhart3547]

Skittering - move lightly and quickly or hurriedly. And a Sean Carroll reference. So no nuclear furnace and the earth is part dark matter? Whaaaaa? Hmm lets see what Anton Petrov says. 😉

[@jmjawors]

Some portion of the Earth being made of dark matter raised my eyebrows, too.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

@@jmjawors Dark matter, as far as we can tell, pervades the universe. so there is some in the earth. (There's also some in you.) Neutrinos could be used ot measure the non-dark matter portion of the earth, while gravitation-based measurements tell you about the combination of matter and dark matter in the earth. The difference between the two measurements will tell you how much dark matter is in the earth.

[@anirudhadhote]

Hi Sir, I have a simple question. Inside a factory at the end of the shift a supervisor and his co-worker are counting the produced objects, the objects are approximately the size of a tennis ball. It is their daily routine,the worker counts the objects as he takes it from the production lot and puts it inside a bag. The role of the supervisor is to keep watch so that there is no mistake while counting. One fine day, before starting the counting process, the supervisor looks at the lot and writes down some random three digit number as quantity of the produced items, in short he assumes that the actual quantity would probably match with that number. Now the question is what are the chances of that actual quantity matching exactly with that random number?

[@beeble2003]

It depends on the distribution from which the random number was drawn. For example, suppose you roll a six-sided die whose sides are numbered 0-5 (slightly unusual, but bear with me). Each of the numbers 0-5 is equally likely to come up. Suppose, instead, that you toss a coin five times and count the number of heads. Now, you'll get 0 and 5 about 3% of the time each, 1 and 4 each about 16%, and 2 and 3 each about 31% of the time. So the choice of distribution can very much alter the probability that the supervisor guesses a particular number and, therefore, the probability that they're right. Now, I guess the reason you're asking the question is that a lot of physics experiments take the form of "Measure some random events, then announce that they agree exactly with theory." The point here is that, first, they're measuring a huge number of random events. That means that they're very likely to see close to the average number of such events, rather than some fluke. Second, "agree exactly" actually means that they're extremely close to the theoretical value but not necessarily exactly equal to it. For example, suppose our theory is that coins are equally likely to come up heads and tails. Our experiment is to toss a coin some number of times and count how many heads. If we toss the coin ten times, it's fairly likely that we'll get 3 or 7 heads, so we don't learn much. But suppose we toss the coin a million times. It's still very unlikely that we'll get exactly 500,000 heads -- even if we have 499,999 heads out of 999,999 tosses, there's only a 50/50 chance that the last flip will give us the result we need. But it can be calculated that the chance of seeing either less than 49% heads or more than 51% heads is about one in nine million. So, in that experiment, the supervisor is very unlikely to guess the actual number of heads but, if they guess 500,000, they're almost certain to be within 1% of the true answer. Or, to put it another way, the actual number of heads when you flip a million coins is almost guaranteed to be between 495,000 and 505,000. And it has about a 97% chance of being between 497,500 and 502,500.

[@polyrhythmia]

Would the vast majority of neutrinos from the early universe inside you be non-relativistic? An item not mentioned is the handedness of neutrinos and antineutrinos. The talk was very informative, especially about the very early work on neutrinos. Do neutrinos pile up in the universe over time is what I wonder about.

[@schmetterling4477]

Yes, they could be non-relativistic. The temperature is approx. 1.95K, which corresponds to 0.1mEcV/c^2. At least the upper bound is three orders of magnitude above that. Could some neutrinos collect in gravity wells? Without any calculation just off the top of my head... probably very few. I don't think the scattering cross section in ordinary matter is nearly large enough for them to thermalize. I could be wrong. Some (also very few) would get caught in black holes, of course.

[@seb_gibbs]

"completely uninterrupted by stars or planets that had anything that happens to get in the way" neutrinos not affected by gravity?

[@jamesrriordon5955]

They are certainly affected by gravity, but they are uninterrupted in that gravity doesn't stop them, unless they pass inside the event horizon of a black hole. No other particle that we know of can pass straight through a star, or even a planet. Dark matter particles might, but those have not technically been discovered yet.

[@CosmicAliveness]

Triple like for sure

[@richardverghese1353]

very indepth talk,a pleasure to listen to.ouestion ; as neutrinos alter mass with spin, ie lower and higher,then ether e equals mc su is at play or they interact with the higgs field alter this to change their mass as opposed to having a fixed mass determined by the higgs ?

[@fr57ujf]

Fascinating.

[@helengrives1546]

I always laugh when people say, ' it shouldn't be here'. Mistaken the map or model for reality. The proper observation should be. 'Hey this is here, where did my idea go wrong, let's do it again!'. Unfortunately I don't have a degree, only common sense.

[@kingdomofashes]

"For the very first time in history, as far as we know, we have the ability to look at the universe with something else". I am being picky I know, but gravitational waves are also a new window on the universe and are not made of electromagnetic radiation so neutrinos are not completely unique in this regard.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Very good point. But you can't yet produce images of the Milky Way or any other structure with gravitational waves. They reveal individual events, so it's more like listening for car crashes in a city than mapping the structures in a city. Someday, gravitational waves will produce images comparable to the ones we get with light, and which we are now starting to get with neutrinos, but we're not there yet.

[@beeble2003]

But we were making neutrino observations before we could even detect gravitational waves.

[@desertshadow6098]

Wonder what level of civilization has harnessed neutrinos to develop 4d models of surrounding universe.

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

Fraser Cain showed a picture of the Universe that uses neutrinos instead of EM radiation. It's very interesting.

[@unicornbatmanmf6346]

This is a new concept that explains free will in the human thought processing

[@beeble2003]

No it doesn't.

[@roscocsa]

Neutrinos With Attitude.

[@jerryrowen1]

Has mister riordan written a book on neutrinos?

[@chekote]

This was super interesting. I had no idea we were using neutrinos to this degree

[@jimalbi]

Big bang neutrinos would be very weak energy, just as the redshifted light that traveled since the CMB because the Universe has vastly expanded since.

[@Kwisatz_HaderachXIII]

Negative

[@jimalbi]

@@Kwisatz_HaderachXIII And how's that?

[@vladimirp2674]

Discovery of the neutrino was really a thing...

[@karmadyllic]

Are neutrinos moving through us are we moving through them?

[@TDrudley]

How long do we get the neutrinos from the big bang? Seriously, how do we know when they started reaching us and when they all passed us?

[@Marrss____666]

they are here... the center of the universe is everywhere

[@TDrudley]

@@Marrss____666 I get that, but I also don't understand, heh. Like, when it was all the size of a football or something, and the universe expanded, faster(?) or slower(?) than now, does that mean that the universe has to loop, cuz wouldn't the neutrinos that were flying around back then have reached the "edge" if it doesn't loop?

[@_PatrickO]

The gamma ray image of the galaxy looks like headlights through fog.

[@maxfloyd7841]

We need to stop trying to touch ghost particles and start trying to look. E equals m c two should mean we can see them through Gravitational wave detector. There should be small static. That is them.

[@shafin3365]

From Bangladesh 🇧🇩

[@MrElvis1971]

#1

[@philipsmith7904]

If i were a neutrino ,i would be in the dark and alone ,tgere would be nothing for me to identifying that i was actualy moving , sometimes something hits me 😮😮😮😮

[@robertnewhart3547]

Aricebo. Opaque.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Haha. Yes, thank you. They were on the tip of my tongue.

[@francretief1]

Ignore this negative comment. This was an excellent talk. Well done.

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Подход к анализу процессов рассматриваемых в лекции вызывает сомнения, причём, на первоначальном этапе. Анализируя материальные процессы, механику берём которую знали от исследователей 19 века. Однако, попробовать по другому представить сам процесс. Говоря о частицах но не разбирая среды в которой эти частицы, всё равно, что кипятить воду ядерными реакциями добывая электричество. Странно всё это.

[@maynardjohnson3313]

And I've always said, what if they want to eat us.

[@user-qc3wi8un3s]

Bioactive micro nano quantum particles....bioelecrric energy...phosphates amino acids fatty acids glucosites.. Algae e- coli shwenela planeria ?

[@virtualworlddisorderrealit1848]

3 flavors? neopolitan?

[@unicornbatmanmf6346]

Ask AI how much recognitive memory it has retained since it's conception and how much outside contact information has it received and from whom it got it from. Then you will have given it a processed order in which it must know. Dustin Normand and I approve this question for ai. 😮😮😮

[@schmetterling4477]

No matter if you are or are not a particle physicist, please try to remember this: A neutrino is a quantum (small amount) of energy. This energy comes with some other properties attached which show the internal symmetries of the vacuum, but at the end of the day it's "just" energy.

[@user-qc3wi8un3s]

Radioctive rare renwables ?

[@schmetterling4477]

@@user-qc3wi8un3s Plentiful gibberish?

[@scottmcdonald5237]

😮

[@mikeg1368]

Could we shoot neutrinos through the sun to learn more about what's going on inside?

[@Swingingbells]

We could shoot them at the sun no problemo. Using that to learn about the insides would be tricky though, because we would need a neutrino detector on the other side to look at them...

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

​@@SwingingbellsGood point! (The lady of the house ask me to point out that it's "el problema." I said that was being snarky. However, she won -- as usual!)

[@Marrss____666]

there's no need tho... the nucleus of the Sun produces a whole ton of neutrinos per second and they are already coming our way. Studying solar neutrinos is already one of the main tools we use to study the nucleus activity.

[@CosmicAliveness]

Quatum

[@MrHerrjon]

If neutrinos didn't exist... then what would happen to the universe? They must serve a purpose, right? One might ask this of any basic building block.

[@clwho4652]

Why do they need to serve a purpose?

[@MrHerrjon]

@@clwho4652I guess there is no requirement for them to serve a purpose but would the physics of reality and life be different without them? The subtle interactions we observe may not seem like much but on a universal scale they probably have profound effects.

[@clwho4652]

@@MrHerrjon With out them thermodynamics would be wrong and we could have perpetual motion machines. I think neutrinos has been rules out as dark matter. Beyond those they might not serve anything. Like Sir Arthur Eddington said: "Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine."

[@woofbarkyap]

@@clwho4652because, so far, everything we've discovered so far it connected to everything else and consequently serves a purpose. Things that don't serve a purpose would just mess things up. That's fine but it would be a whole new universe that went against all the things we've observed so far, which is a big ask. That's not the end of it though. Relativity was a big ask that changed the entire way we understand the universe because, so far, everything we discover backs it up. So it's not impossible but a lot of evidence is required to counter everything we already have and so far all the evidence sides with the status quo on this matter.

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Попробуем взглянуть на всё происходящее с точки зрения анализа ситуации. Кто то сделал открытие и сформулировал своё виденье процессов в изложении для нас, мы теперь смотрим на процессы его формулировками ( каждый из нас процессы не открывал, а брал как учили). Так что " О сколько нам открытий чудных, готовит просвещенья дух".@@woofbarkyap

[@backonyeon]

I realize you said that those who "Knew" only "Knew" about 40% more but only after directly admittimg limited knowledge that you "weren't going to get into". This seems quite a bit like spiritual elitism (I cannot understand your faith). I would appreciate a chance to try. Whether to agree or deny. Otherwise how do you even back up the 40% ?

[@beeble2003]

It's not spiritual elitism because it's not spiritual and it's not elitism. The reason he doesn't give you the "chance to try" is that the talk would be literally thousands of hours long if he tried to explain everything that is known about neutrinos -- searching arXiv for "neutrino" gives 35,899 papers.

[@Hal_McKinney]

Simply Imagine: Space, Time, Light, Matter, Antimatter, Dark Matter, Energy, ALL Forces (including Gravity), the Whole Universe as Neutrinos…

[@michaelmyrick6973]

they called it the Æther once.

[@user-ju4bj6nv6z]

Называют, как это будет странно. Есть даже теория "Эфиродинамики" изложенная Владимиром Акимовичем Ацюковским. Довольно таки интересная механика процесса в той теории.@@michaelmyrick6973

[@beeble2003]

I don't see why the matter/antimatter, how can the universe exist at all thing is a problem. Sure, if the universe was created with _exactly_ equal amounts of matter and antimatter, it would all have annihilated by now and there'd be nothing left. But if you start with the slightest imbalance, say 50.1% matter, 49.9% antimatter, then all the antimatter annihilates with most of the matter, leaving us with 0.2% of the original amount of stuff, which is everything we see today. The same argument applies for any split that's not exactly 50/50.

[@schmetterling4477]

There is no need to start with a slight imbalance. One can cook up recipes for a very large imbalance just as well.

[@fcasarsa]

Can the ICE CUBE Detector listen for nuclear submarines?

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Very good question! It's not sensitive to the low energy neutrinos coming from submarines. Other neutrino detectors that use other detection methods, could, but they aren't good enough yet to be practical.

[@schmetterling4477]

The neutrino flux of a reactor can be detected out to maybe a couple of miles, but that's probably it. Even then the event rates would be way too small to track a moving reactor. It's also not necessary. We have very effective ways of tracking submarines.

[@fcasarsa]

@@jamesrriordon5955 it is not hard to believe that $ is not a limiting factor while talking of finding nuclear submarines or communicate under the sea. Governments have spent trillions doing this!

[@maynardjohnson3313]

You could encode a beam of neutrinos with Morse code "hello", but what if the recipient doesn't speak English?

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

An answer comes from information theory (of which I am not an expert.) There are methods of differentiating between noise vs. information (i.e. meaning.) The receiver may not speak English, however, they would know that its sender is intelligent.

[@manjsher3094]

Pay wall. So sad.

[@CosmicAliveness]

You need a re appearance pretty much. Neutrinos means super sub atmoic subway woffer brian mew

[@nikolapanic9614]

serpent doesn't have legs or kangaroo head.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

The Wardaman people named the artwork "Sky Boss and the Rainbow Serpent," so you'll have to take it up with them. I'm not sure "serpent" is strictly synonymous with "snake." Merriam-Webster says a serpent is "a noxious creature that creeps, hisses, or stings." Snakes don't sting, and there's no mention of legs (or a lack of them) so, it seems, "serpent" has a broader meaning than just "snake."

[@CosmicAliveness]

Tell the humans time is the enemy

[@AdrianBoyko]

Stop looking, I found them.

[@Cheka__]

Amazing. That's why they call it the god particle. This is one of the best Ted talks I've ever heard.

[@beeble2003]

Um. It's not a Ted talk.

[@Cheka__]

@@beeble2003 I disagree. Looks like a Ted talk.

[@schmetterling4477]

Nobody ever called neutrinos that. Physicists don't call the Higgs that, either. We call it the Higgs. After all, Christians also don't call Jesus "Flubber". ;-)

[@Cheka__]

@@schmetterling4477 I disagree. Those things move as fast as light and can go through planets. Seems pretty godlike to me.

[@Kurt-ee6fo]

There was a eclipse I have a ring camera I first thought rain But the rain was coming through the property roof throw concrete must have been nutrino Star dust The eclipse from NASA showed a explosion on the moon We got shower from star dust

[@ramborambo2072]

so people get more problems better of when t rex was around not impressed

[@backonyeon]

At 1min 13sec why claim "probably before that" ? Are there betting odds your not letting on to? Probabilities can be discussed in ratios, correct? What is the probability? Do you mean "possibly" or do you just mean to encourage those unfamiliar in psycho/lingual debauchery not to look further?

[@maynardjohnson3313]

We can always listen but I question the wisdom of speaking.

[@hooked4215]

The problem is not thermodynamics, it's probability. Since probability works (apparently) at a macroscopic level, it doesn't at a microscopic level (remember the collapse of Schródinger equation).

[@mcolville]

I'm pretty sure if the Sun "winked out of existance" we would know about it before 200,000 years passed.

[@nvanderhoff]

Wait what are you going here? Love your teams work! And you reminded me I should link my hobbies and add more frontier physics to my dnd

[@UJ-nt5oo]

He was referring to the core. it takes 200k years for light to escape then 8 mins to reach us, so if the core disappeared, we wont know for 200k years but if we look at nutrinos we will know in 8 mins since nutrinos escape without interacting.

[@RayosMcQueen]

I aasume that the escape time is distributed statistically. While the average photon might take 200’000 years to ooze out, there will be some that make it out much quicker. We will therefore see a dimming of the sun presumably with massive freezing of earth long before that time.

[@mcolville]

@@RayosMcQueen Dude is a science journalist, I think he just got two different famous facts about the sun and gravity and photons conflated.

[@peterb2272]

The quote was "centre of the sun".

[@guderian557]

'pounds'? 'feet'? It is not the dark ages anymore, tell your lecturers to use standard units of measurement.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

It's tough when you're talking about historical events, and the units have meaning in the historical context. Cowan and Reines specifically set their experiment ~137 feet from the detonation tower as an homage to the fine structure constant. Crane didn't buy a 0.907 kg bag of salt; he bought a bag of salt labeled 2 pounds. While Cowan and Reines themselves eventually changed their diagrams to say 40 meters, they chose ~137 feet for a very specific reason that using metric units would obscure in this context. Just to beat a dead horse, Jesse Owens ran the 100-yard dash in 9.4 seconds in 1935. He didn't run the 91.44 meter dash.

[@johndoolan9732]

How about this I need someone who can take my writing there straight from my mind some maybe crazy ramblings because as it is I probably got 7 different theoretical QM TO SPORT AND SCIENCE NUCLEAR POWER STRING QUARTET ALSO I PUT THE MOOD TOP LEFT H 4 HIGH L 4 LOW AS IN FEELING S 4 yourself if see any differentially to theory of everything me and how I see

[@longcastle4863]

“Flavor “ is an unfortunately silly terminology.

[@DrDeuteron]

why? what would you prefer??

[@awebmate]

They didn't make it up for this particular purpose. It is common to use the word flavor for variants of the same thing.

[@fredrikbreivald388]

If you don’t like flavor then you’re going to hate the names for the quarks. 😊 they’re named by physicist not poets.

[@longcastle4863]

@@fredrikbreivald388 I prefer Platchett’s flavors: _up, down, sideways and peppermint._

[@longcastle4863]

@@DrDeuteron kind of, type of… What does the word flavor do that those don’t do?

[@denisjudehaughton7363]

I feel sorry for James Riordan who was led astray by the consensus scientists; neurtinos are heat

[@jamesrriordon5955]

Neutrinos are particles with mass and spin. They have temperatures, if that's what you mean. The relic neutrinos from the big bang are very cold, the ones from nuclear reactions in the sun are quite warm.

[@schmetterling4477]

Awh, look at you! You are living in a cold basement. ;-)

[@beeble2003]

"Consensus scientists" There is no other kind of scientist. That is how science works.

[@denisjudehaughton7363]

quality control is not consensus@@beeble2003

[@christiancampbell466]

I hate science journalists. Why is this guy at RI?

[@backonyeon]

What equipment has been used to measure the (approx) number of Neutrinos "flying out of your watch"? How was this device calibrated? On what (40% knowledge scale) basis was this calibration technique devised? Agreed upon? Certified? For literal "F" sake.... You are smarter than me! Probably by a lot! All we're asking is (1) show you're work. (2) stop calling best guess fact just cause you think we'll be impressed by the shiny titles you givw each other. I barely finished highschool. My daughter is an actual theoretical physicist. Humble down a bit. Talk on what yoy know. What you suspect. And what yoy have belief in. Cause until you show me a Neutrino.....we would seem to have similar problems with the others faith system! Juat be honest man!

[@backonyeon]

Sorry intended "U" comes up "Y" so often. My thumbs are grotesque.😂

[@Marrss____666]

The number of expected neutrinos "flying out of your watch" is an estimation based on several different neutrino flux measurements and theoretical models predictions. Neutrinos have been detected many times, every single day. Most of the current experiments use water as a detection medium, and "see" neutrinos through their interaction via reverse beta decay. Some newer experiments use Liquid Argon as a medium. Search for the "DUNE" and "SuperK" experiments. I think I understand what you are saying and asking for, but the science he is talking about is very well established. Maybe you are right that he makes it slightly too mysterious for effect.

[@jamesrriordon5955]

@@backonyeon That's based on the amount of tritium in the watch and the half life of the tritium. One neutrino is emitted with each tritium decay, so it's an easy calculation. There is no device that can count those neutrinos directly

[@beeble2003]

"show you're work" No, that's not how talks work. If he showed his working for every calculation, and derived the equations he used to do those calculations, this would be a semester-long lecture course, rather than a one-hour talk. "the shiny titles you givw each other" Buh? None of this talk is based on shiny titles or appeals to authority. I don't think he even mentions anybody's title.

[@backonyeon]

Sorry don't mean to discount you but didn't you just say that some filks were trained to to train AI what neutrinos look like now you're mocking the AI output? Again, you're probably right cause you're probably smarter but, buddy; if you would distinguish between theory, fact and faith (i only use Oxford commas when needed) even once; acknowledging that all 3 are necessary to follow your yellow brick road. I'd probably be all on board. As it sits, seems pretty obvious you don't care about truth. Your job is to ... I don't know but any job where you can't clearly delineate those 3 (theory, fact and faith) is sad. Looking forward to next RI video.never know what to expect. You should also do more, irrespective of anything I've said, you're a very good public speaker. Good luck.