Slashdot Mirror
Experiments Create Particles Out of a Vacuum Using Neutrinos
BarbaraHudson writes: In a new series of experiments, scientists report (abstract) that neutrinos, notable for how infrequently they interact with matter, can strike a glancing blow on an atom's nucleus, and the side effect is the generation of a new particle out of a vacuum. Professor Kevin McFarland says the creation of the new particle is what shields the nucleus from being blown apart by the collision. "Producing an entirely new particle – in this case a charged pion – requires much more energy than it would take to blast the nucleus apart – which is why the physicists are always surprised that the reaction happens as often as it does. McFarland adds that even painstakingly detailed theoretical calculations for this reaction 'have been all over the map.'"
A quick look at wiki shows that gravitons are still unproven.
Pions are appareantly mesons (they have a quark and an antiquark) and decay to muons or gamma rays.
I'm not sure if there's any proposed relationship between pions and gravitons, though for that matter I'm not quite sure what a pion or a graviton is.
I will say that conversion of enery to matter and vice-veresa, in and of itself, seems to be old news.
Its probably best to read the instructions
Its better with to ones that have a bag. Those ones with just a cylindrical plastic container that you just tip into the garbage can - even if you don't spill it, some of the smaller particles are going to get back into the air that you breathe.
It's just like work: a bunch of pions popping in and out of a corporate vacuum.
Table-ized A.I.
Where did you get the idea that vaccum is nothing? Actually, vacuum is a very busy place
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Rendering artifacts due to floating point precision!
As usual for physics articles, a non-paywalled version is available on arXiv, and has been so for more than a month before it appeared behind the paywall. Why do people who submit physics stories to slashdot aloways link to the useless paywalled version?
pions are basically made up of quarks just like the neutron and the proton: there's nothing magical about it, and has absolutely nothing to do with gravitons (if such even exist except as a mathematical concept). the difference is that pions only contain two quarks (rather than three) and so they're not stable. imagine throwing two magnets into the air very very carefully and having them spin around each other for a very brief period of time. if they fly apart, splat no more particle: if they touch, splat no more particle. but for that incredibly short duration where the two quarks successfully spin around each other in close orbit, there you have a "pion".
The summary is horribly incorrect. There are no new experiments, only new analysis of old experiments. The authors didn't actually do the experiments but "digitize and reanalyze data from both experiments." The summary didn't include the non-paywalled version of the article on arXiv. The summary sensationalizes the results with phrases like "[p]roducing an entirely new particle." (ok it is a quote) which leads non-physicist readers to think this is a new particle as yet unseen when in fact all particles involved are well known. Furthermore, pulling a particle out of the vacuum, especially near such massive and charged objects a nuclei is not at all uncommon. Sure it is a non-electromagnetic process but it isn't odd.
TFS's topic of "Experiments Create Particles Out of a Vacuum Using Neutrinos" is not discussed in the paper
of 18 Nov which you linked, but in McFarland's 25 Nov paper
From the latter,
Scientists were surprised with penicillin.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Earl Grey, hot.
Have gnu, will travel.
It's also worth mentioning that discovering the existence of gravitons would blow a hole in General Relativity - it's one of the areas where quantum mechanics and relativity stand in stark opposition. So unlike the Higgs Boson, gravitons aren't something where the theory all agrees that it should exist, but we just haven't (hadn't) actually spotted it yet.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Well, enough glancing blows and you can at least generate hamburger where there used to be elected officials, and that might be an improvement. But the particle accelerator would need to be quite small so that you could swing it effectively.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.