Posted on 08/22/2020 1:57:04 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Exotic subatomic particles, sterile neutrinos, are no-shows in experiments, increasing doubts about their existence.
University of Cincinnati physicists, as part of an international research team, are raising doubts about the existence of an exotic subatomic particle that failed to show up in twin experiments.
UC College of Arts and Sciences associate professor Alexandre Sousa and assistant professor Adam Aurisano took part in an experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in search of sterile neutrinos, a suspected fourth "flavor" of neutrino that would join the ranks of muon, tau, and electron neutrinos as elementary particles that make up the known universe.
Finding a fourth type of neutrino would be huge, Sousa said. It would redefine our understanding of elementary particles and their interactions in what's known as the Standard Model.
Researchers in two experiments called Daya Bay and MINOS+ collaborated on complementary projects in an intense effort to find sterile neutrinos using some of the world's most advanced and precise tools.
"We apparently don't see any evidence for them," Aurisano said.
The study was published in the journal Physical Review Letters and was featured in Physics Magazine, published by the American Physical Society.
"It's an important result for particle physics," Sousa said. "It provides an almost definitive answer to a question that has been lingering for over 20 years."
(Excerpt) Read more at scitechdaily.com ...
Your physics is 150 years out of date!
“Furthermore, when you try to nail them down on what exactly an electron is, they instantly go to the impossible “wave-particle duality””
LOL! Then you can’t. call them particle-ists!
“Except there’s a problem when you try to verify this with experiment. When you lower the pressure, the electric current DECREASES. In vacuum the current goes to zero.”
LOL! You should then call them anti-vacuum tubes?
No, it’s institutional physics which is 150 years out of date. They are still using a conceptual paradigm that predates the discovery of electricity.
Since you seem more interested in remaining blissfully ignorant than actually learning something about the nature of reality, we’re done. Have a good day.
“Since you seem more interested in remaining blissfully ignorant than actually learning something about the nature of reality, we’re done.”
Nothing to learn from you except fake science.
Apparently to you, science is a religion built on previous beliefs, and not a method of determining truth.
You are an unserious person. Don’t talk to me again.
“They are still using a conceptual paradigm that predates the discovery of electricity.”
Humor. me! Love to hear you explain that!
Sorry, you’ve lost the privilege of communicating with me.
Perhaps with your next opportunity to learn something you will be less arrogant, ignorant, and offensive in your approach.
But with me, you’ve burned your bridge and deserve no more of my time or attention.
Goodbye and good riddance.
“Sorry, you’ve lost the privilege of communicating with me.”
That really hurts!
I see you’ve experienced the science of thoughtomato. Every time I’ve asked him for sources for his claims he get mad insults me & runs away.
“I see you’ve experienced the science of thoughtomato. Every time I’ve asked him for sources for his claims he get mad insults me & runs away.”
At least he is consistent.
I don’t recall ever interacting with Reily, but if he pulled the same science-as-religion BS that you pull - likely, as it’s not an uncommon reaction to a challenge to orthodoxy, in low-IQ individuals - then the same reaction would indeed be appropriate.
QED
The both of you are amazingly low IQ low character individuals.
“then the same reaction would indeed be appropriate.”
You don’t win arguments with fake science and insults.
> You don’t win arguments with fake science and insults.
And that is precisely why I have contempt for you.
I gave you a scientific experiment you could perform yourself, and not for a single moment did you approach it with anything but fake science and insults.
You are a person not intelligent enough for this subject and should just resign yourself to being unable to understand these topics.
“I gave you a scientific experiment you could perform yourself, and not for a single moment did you approach it with anything but fake science and insults.”
Your conclusion was totally false. You cannot back it up.
You have not done any of the work to determine the truth of falsity of my conclusion. None at all. You have taken your pre-baked assumption and declared it as fact without any scientific method applied whatsoever.
It’s a repeatable experiment - a hard-and-fast requirement to be genuine science - unlike almost anything done in particle physics today.
Anyway... you clearly lack the education in basic scientific method to see how outrageously anti-scientific your approach is, and I lack the time to fully educate you on the basics of what is actual science and what isn’t.
You can start with this: If you don’t have a repeatable, independently verifiable experiment, it is BY DEFINITION not science.
“You can start with this: If you don’t have a repeatable, independently verifiable experiment, it is BY DEFINITION not science.”
Your ‘experiment’ is not science. You fail to provide even the slimmest verification.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.