Neutrino Telescopes may have nothing to see

[BDOA]

With physicists building big neutrino detectors like IceCube and Anteras astrophysicists
where hoping for a completely new way of seeing the universe. However the first
results for neutrino astronomy coming the old Super Kamiokande labs,
and from around 1500 neutrino in the TeV range, the've found Nothing,
no point sources, no excess from the Sun, no excess from the galactic
center, and even no excess from cosmic ray interactions with intersteller
gas in our spiral arms. The're picture of incoming neutrino directions was pretty much isotropic.

Now this is not what people where expecting at all, from the using theory of
WIMPS for dark matter, dark matter anhillation should have left plenty of
sources in the neutrino sky, especially the sun and galactic center. But
even without dark matter, there should have been excesses from cosmic
rays interactions and from pulsars. The null result looks difficult to
explain, unless neutrino feel some field (like a magnetic field but not the
usual magnetic field) that's scrambing up the direction they fly in.

Well i had the idea that neutrinos get a gauge force to themselves
for while now, so I'm biased and always look for confirmations
of my idea first in any paper i read, but can
anyone see any other reason for the null results from SuperK?

 

[malawi_glenn]

that homepage of yours, do you have confirmation about the theoris in like Physical journals and so on?

The Neutrino flux from SN1987A was recorded, maybe not with IceCube or Amanda, but the processes that, in theory, should produce large fluxes of neutrinos are out there.

 

[BDOA]

that homepage of yours, do you have confirmation about the theoris in like Physical journals and so on?

Nothing as yet, trying for a peer reviewed submission to a journal, at the
moment. Consider it a pre-print from a hopeful outsider.

The Neutrino flux from SN1987A was recorded, maybe not with IceCube or Amanda, but the processes that, in theory, should produce large fluxes of neutrinos are out there.

Indeed there where, it was about 20 to 26 detected neutrinos worldwide, from 100,000 light years away. But those are a different energy range to the above results, 2-10MeV for the supernova observations, and 1 GeV-1TeV for above SuperK run. Maybe my title should be, Neutrino telescopes may have nothing to see, between supernova events.

It leaves the question how do the supernova neutrinos get here in a straight line, and none of others do? Maybe the supernova makes enough of a pulse distortation in the field that bends neutrinos for them to get
a one time free striaght path to travel down.

 

[malawi_glenn]

Who said that the neutrinos from SN1987A traveled a straight line?

This supernova is the closest core collapse supernova this century, that's why we could register neutrinos from it.. And there are other events that we could register neutrinos from: AGN and GRO. And there are other techinques developing: aucostic and radio telescopes.

 

[BDOA]

Who said that the neutrinos from SN1987A traveled a straight line?

Well the neutrinos got here hours before the light from explosion did, so that can't have been sent very far off course. Doesn't mean all the neutrinos
went straight but the pulse measured did, and with less than a second
dispersion on a signal (actually two pulses) that traveled 100,000 light years.

Makes it all the stranger that SuperK, didn't measure any point sources or
clump sources of neutrinos at higher energy.

 

[malawi_glenn]

According to models of how supernovas are formed, the large neutrino flux is emitted a time before the light is..

And a star 100 000 Ly from us is regared as a point source.

"It leaves the question how do the supernova neutrinos get here in a straight line, and none of others do? Maybe the supernova makes enough of a pulse distortation in the field that bends neutrinos for them to get
a one time free striaght path to travel down"

Is just nothing that a mere misunderstanding how isotropic sources far far away are seen from Earth i belive.

http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/StarDeath/sn1987a.html

And wasn't Super Kamiokande starting operating at 1996?..

 

[BDOA]

According to models of how supernovas are formed, the large neutrino flux is emitted a time before the light is..

Is just nothing that a mere misunderstanding how isotropic sources far far away are seen from Earth i belive.

you might be right be right, but only if, the major sources of GeV neutrinos are only extra galactic - active galaxy nuclei and gamma ray bursters. For everything else, some anisotropicy ought to have turned up in that many
events.

 

[malawi_glenn]

I have done Neutrino astrophysics courses. And yes, major neutrino high energy sources are AGN and GR bursts.

Pretty odd that you didnt comment on my comment that is was no strange at all that Super-K did not see neutrinos from SN1987A, it wasn't even built then...

If you haven't done that yet, try posting your new theory/paper in the "Beyond the standard model". People there know a lot more about particle physics than I do and people that hang around in this subforum.

 

[BDOA]

Thanks for you vote of interest, actually new theories belong in the
independent research forum, but since the moderators there hasn't logged in
for over two months, i'll post it to the beyond standard model forum.

 

[Michael Mozina]

With physicists building big neutrino detectors like IceCube and Anteras astrophysicists
where hoping for a completely new way of seeing the universe. However the first
results for neutrino astronomy coming the old Super Kamiokande labs,
and from around 1500 neutrino in the TeV range, the've found Nothing,
no point sources, no excess from the Sun, no excess from the galactic
center, and even no excess from cosmic ray interactions with intersteller
gas in our spiral arms. The're picture of incoming neutrino directions was pretty much isotropic.

Thanks for that link by the way, your timing was impeccable as this paper relates to another conversation I'm currently involved in. I'll be reading that paper for awhile. :)

I'm a bit puzzled here by your suggestion that they found "nothing". The fact they didn't find point sources in the dataset is just as noteworthy and interesting as finding point sources in the dataset, particularly as it relates to WIMP theories, and solar theories, etc. That lack of finding point sources is a "finding" in and of itself.

Now this is not what people where expecting at all, from the using theory of
WIMPS for dark matter, dark matter anhillation should have left plenty of
sources in the neutrino sky, especially the sun and galactic center.

Yes, and they didn't find any evidence of a WIMP destruction point sources in the earth, the sun, or the galactic core. That would tend to falsify, or at least throw a very wet blanket on WIMP annihilation theories.

But even without dark matter, there should have been excesses from cosmic
rays interactions and from pulsars. The null result looks difficult to
explain, unless neutrino feel some field (like a magnetic field but not the
usual magnetic field) that's scrambing up the direction they fly in.

Well i had the idea that neutrinos get a gauge force to themselves
for while now, so I'm biased and always look for confirmations
of my idea first in any paper i read, but can
anyone see any other reason for the null results from SuperK?

Well, I can think of several possible reasons off the top of my head. The most obvious reasons is that their detector may simply require a much longer sampling of data because of it's very low neutrino detection rate. It could also be that WIMPS simply don't exist, or are not annihilated by objects in our solar system or galaxy. It seems that most of these high energy neutrinos hits come from unidentified sources and did not come from the objects being studied. Even without obvious point sources in the dataset, I would still love to see very high resolution neutrino images of the universe. These types of data sets are extremely useful even if the results are hard to explain.