SuperK Neutrino Detector Severely Damaged.

Eric Sharkey writes "The Super-Kamiokande neutrino detector, which announced the discovery of neutrino oscillation and mass in 1998 (covered by Slashdot at the time), has been severely damaged. The NY Times (free reg, blah blah) has an article here. Most of the phototubes have been destroyed. Repair estimates top $30M, leaving the world far less capable of observing the next supernova neutrino burst, should it arrive before repairs or a replacement could be completed." CD: I called the lead of the project and he was in the tank checking out the damage. The webpage for the Super-Kamiokande is here. There are pictures for you to peruse.

Comments

You'd think they could say why

[hackman]

Seems strange that the article was so sketchy on why the damage was done. They sort of implied that the tank got overfilled, but then again they really avoided saying anything.

Why would a research instution hide the reason for the damage, afraid that they are going to cripple someone's career? It certainly is a tragedy, but the fact that they are not disclosing the real reason for the damage makes it more interesting somehow.

Thumbs up for cool Neutrino detectors though, it has been an unexplained scientific phenomena for a long time now. I hope they can fix it (and have the $$ too).

Brett

Re:You'd think they could say why

[Joe Decker]

Seems strange that the article was so sketchy on why the damage was done.

Doesn't to me. Premature guessing as to the cause before investigation could be potentially damaging to any funding sources. The funding politics of large science projects can be quite complex. Completely normal.

Re:Next Supernova

[tomknight]

Why isn't there a moderation category "-1, unbelievebly stupid"?

Tom.

Re:Supernovae

[Eric Sharkey]

While the accident is a tragic blow to some valid and interesting research, no one should lose any sleep over the possibility of being unable to analyze the next big supernova before it can be repaired. After all, supernovae on the scale of SN1987A occur once every few hundred years (the last two occurred in 1054 and 1572.) I suspect repairing Super-K will take significantly faster than that.

Two things:

Deterministic probability doesn't work. A rate of 1/500 years means that in any given year, there's a 0.2% chance of a near-by supernova. The fact that there was one recently doesn't rule out that the next one could happen tomorrow. If you're going to watch for a SN, it's better to be ready for it as much of the time as possible. The fact that it's so rare makes it more important to be ready for it, not less. If one happened every day, no one would care about missing one.

SuperK was much more sensitive than the detectors used to detect the 1987A supernova. In other words, it doesn't need a "big" (nearby) supernova in order to be able to see it. A supernova which is further away, and not visible to the naked eye, would still produce a detectable neutrino pulse which would provide more scientific information than the 1987A observation with comparatively crude equipment. SuperK was even sensitive enough to detect extragalactic supernovae in the neighboring Andromeda galaxy. The ability to increase the volume of space you're observing means that you've greatly increased the observation rate as well. It's still a rare event, but it's no longer miniscule.