0PingWithJesus

8 ms·

1.
by 0PingWithJesus 7mo ago
That was Super-K, the same detector she's talking about in the video. The incident occurred in 2001 and set back the start of the data taking for them quite a bit, they were able to begin data taking by re-distributing the unaffected p
2.
by 0PingWithJesus 8mo ago
Reminds me of Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" (1985), in which he argues that TV as a medium is fundamentally incapable of producing anything other than entertainment. So things like news, political discussion, or
3.
by 0PingWithJesus 10mo ago
This has some great examples, enough to get started and provide some inspiration, but is sadly incomplete. https://rougier.github.io/python-opengl/book.html
4.
by 0PingWithJesus 3y ago
To be a bit nit-picky, Cherenkov light typically has a wide spectrum. For water it spans the entire optical range, peaking around 350nm and dying off at longer wavelengths. So you could, for example, put dye in water such that it absorbed
5.
by 0PingWithJesus 3y ago
It's kinda a complicated question. Cherenkov radiation can be produced in any medium that has index of refraction greater than 1, that's what allows the charged particle radiation to go faster than the light it produces, which ult
6.
by 0PingWithJesus 3y ago
One line in the piece says "Observing the direct effects of radiation, although possible, requires extraordinary circumstances.". While this is mostly true, you can actually observe radiation directly, with your own eyeballs, with
7.
by 0PingWithJesus 3y ago
Most neutrino experiments don't/didn't use heavy water, but the SNO experiment did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudbury_Neutrino_Observatory
8.
by 0PingWithJesus 3y ago
The only neutrino detector placed in a salt mine was the IMB detector. That detector was ~10kt of water observed by ~2 thousand photo-detectors, it was located ~600meters underground. The only neutrino detector that's a mile undergroun
9.
by 0PingWithJesus 5y ago
I think you're correct to say a lot of people simplify what the problem is with neutrino mass. In principle it seems like there is no problem, you just add a mass term for the neutrino just like any other particle. Just b/c at fir
10.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
Articles like this always remind me of Clifford's "The Ethics of Belief". I feel like no one ever sums up the the importance of thorough and independent thought as well as Clifford did 150 years ago. http://people.
11.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
For their more recent data they reported seeing ~32000 solar neutrino events over a 1600 day dataset (cite: top-right of page 13 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.07538.pdf ). Their detector nowadays is more sensitive than it
12.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
I think what you're seeing is either a random noise fluctuations, or perhaps a result of the coordinate system they're using for that image. If you take a look at a similar, more up to date, image from Super-K that uses more data
13.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
The Ice Cube experiment has done that exact thing. Here's the most recent publication from them on that subject, https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.08488 . Here's a slight older but perhaps more digestible result from
14.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
You are correct, that happened to the Super-K detector in the early 2000s. It's briefly mentioned here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-Kamiokande#History
15.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
The detector does not "look" in any direction, it is in no way "pointed" at the sun. It records the direction of all events that occur within its volume. But once recorded they compare the direction of all events with th
16.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
In principle yes....although the specifics of the physics involved kinda make the question itself not well posed. There is no hard boundary to the core of the sun. The "core" is by definition where nuclear fusion reactions occur.
17.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
This article is quite old but a more recent measurement from the same experiment (Super-K) used a 1600 day dataset. Of that 1600 days of exposure 860 "days" were nights. So it's pretty close to half and half. (Cite: Section V
18.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
The process behind this measurement is that the neutrino hits an electron in the detector. That electron will (with relatively high likelihood) travel in the same direction as the incident neutrino. The Cherenkov radiation produced by the
19.
by 0PingWithJesus 6y ago
It's a bit of a subtle point but Majorana anti-neutrinos are still right handed chiral particle and a Majorana neutrino is still a left handed particle. So any particle-antiparticle effects from Delta-CP (or anything else) just become
20.
by 0PingWithJesus 9y ago
I used Shankar's quantum mechanics book for my first course of quntum in undergraduate. And his "Basic Training In Math" as a supplementary book in another course. And I recall being very frustrated with the total lack of exp
21.
by 0PingWithJesus 10y ago
I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say there's no currying in common lisp? If you write functions that are curried then you'll have currying. Am I missing something?