Slashdot Mirror

It's not like they are using real-time data from this thing - it's more like a traditional particle smashing experiment where most of the analysis is done months and years after the data is collected.

Well, in some cases the detection of a high energy neutrino has triggered a search for a counterpart at other wavelengths (X-ray, optical etc.).
So near real-time detection of a neutrino can be important to determine its astrophysical origin.
http://www.astronomerstelegram...
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

And from the ANTARES neutrino telescope:
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

It's not like they are using real-time data from this thing - it's more like a traditional particle smashing experiment where most of the analysis is done months and years after the data is collected.

Well, in some cases the detection of a high energy neutrino has triggered a search for a counterpart at other wavelengths (X-ray, optical etc.).
So near real-time detection of a neutrino can be important to determine its astrophysical origin.
http://www.astronomerstelegram...
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

And from the ANTARES neutrino telescope:
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

It's not like they are using real-time data from this thing - it's more like a traditional particle smashing experiment where most of the analysis is done months and years after the data is collected.

Well, in some cases the detection of a high energy neutrino has triggered a search for a counterpart at other wavelengths (X-ray, optical etc.).
So near real-time detection of a neutrino can be important to determine its astrophysical origin.
http://www.astronomerstelegram...
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

And from the ANTARES neutrino telescope:
http://www.astronomerstelegram...

There are a couple of reasons for that, that don't involve the universe going quiet on us. The first is that there's a delay between the FRB being detected and the FRB being noticed: most of the FRBs on that list were found by trawling through archived data from years ago, using improved signal-processing techniques. The second is that there's a delay between the FRB being noticed and the FRB being published: the astronomers take a while to analyse it, measure its dispersion and spectrum, make sure it's real, etc., before they submit a paper describing it. And then there's a further delay while another scientist peer-reviews the paper, sends back comments, requires changes, etc., before the paper is published.

Once detecting FRBs becomes routine - the bugs in the equipment are worked out, the analysis techniques are standardised, etc. - then they'll probably start publishing them within a day or so with a quick Astronomers' Telegram, rather than writing up a whole paper about each one. Eventually, they'll probably start issuing automated alerts, so other telescopes can start slewing around to take a look at the FRB within seconds of it going off. But for now, we're stuck with this year-or-so delay between detection and publication.

Well heck, if it's "news" every time there's not an explanation for something... excuse me, I've got a few thousand peer-reviewed papers to go write.

Or have they decided on a mechanism for white dwarves exceeding the Chandrasekhar mass before blowing themselves up?

Keck and the other scopes on Mauna Kea will, though, sometimes try to sneak a peek at a "high-priority" target like this, if they can find the time in their busy schedules.

Oh, along with Rochester Astronomy, a couple other cool sources for announcements of newly found supernovae and such are the IAU Circulars (subscription required) and Astronomer's Telegram. For gamma ray bursts, check out NASA's Gamma ray bursts Coordinates Network, too.