RE: Probing cosmic neutrinos with a giant 200000 km2 detector
so here i am (after six days, i know, sorry) almost at the third paragraph gaping in awe at this thing sitting at a nice 2.5 km deep into the arctic ice , making it another modern world wonder like CERN (and there people say it's just not like the old days and the pyramids ain't coming back , as i start talking in brackets i'll leave out the rant and dissertation on why there is not a floating hangar in space, a factory and warehouse that could basically save zounds on cost as a supply line to wherever , the moon ? mars ? the gas mines of uranus (pun not intended) could be set up, i see THIS, i see the LHC and i ask myself why havent they done that yet, there's so many resources out there and so few here ... yes i know, always do that don't i)
as i find out Einstein has been misquoted all along :
FTL is possible if you go through matter ?
i read about the Chinese detector quite a while ago but afaik their biggest problem was not building it (yes another world wonder) or the operating cost but finding people to work in it ? Is that solved yet ? seems like a bit of a waste and Trump will probably strongarm his MIT-ians to not do it.
Chopin is 208 years old btw and i still think he's not old but more like a classic when i'm in the mood for that.
I like the idea of creative use of resources very much, setting up a massive project at minimal cost, especially in these days. Even if mister Donald has promised to vamp up the space program i havent seen liftoff to the moon yet so any and all results, especially at lower cost will be beneficial to the future of us all.
Leaves me just one question : How hard do i have to run into a wall so i travel through matter fast enough to end up at proxima centauri within my lifetime ? :D
you know me by now ofcourse, i think its time i update that one too
Which Chinese detector? The one I am discussing in the post? A small-scale part will be developed and deplyed to test the viability of the project. There is an international team behind it and thy work hard to make it happen.
Budget is a crucial issue in fundamental science. We have very limited resources those days.
My answer: don't try! :)
PS: glad to still see comments on my rarer and rarer physics posts ^^
the one i read about :)
[here] we are, took almost five google searches to find that back
if my last name was Gates i'd sponsor one to Proxima Centauri you know that
how come you post less on physics then ? its the most interesting part to me ?
trying to deviate traffic to the new app ?
The reason is simple: steemstem takes all my time and I have less time for my own blog. But I finally managed to write something today. Dark matter is back :)
dark matter is back lol
it must be nice to be able to work on a project like #steemstem at high level like that, even if i dont think id be the person to handle something like that , figuring it out seems like a mighty fine puzzle :p
i had a weird idea last time after watching that video on cherenkov shiney lights, like if particles can travel through matter FASTER than light wouldnt that distort the whole vision of the "observable" universe then ? i mean everything that goes through matter might suddenly not adhere to common formulas if it goes FTL, you take some beam from somewhere or you take the time it take light to reach the telescope or whatever and its assumed that lightspeed is the top speed but that woman in that video was like "o but they always leave something out, it CAN , if it goes through matter", so neutrinos and dark matter might be moving ? faster than light, which sets off every calculation since einstein, right ?
or is that all incorporated?
@lemouth i'll just mention, in case, but please take your time, there's no expiry date on comments or replies
That is easy to answer. I will do it immediately :)
The key point is that the speed of light in the vacuum is the largest possible speed. However, the speed of light in matter may be slower. Therefore, when a particle leaves a given a medium (where the speed of light is larger) and enters another medium (where the speed of light is smaller), it can get faster than the speed of light. It then generates Cerenkov radiation (in the same way an airplane traveling above the speed of sound generates a bang).
oh ...
i see ...
it's a trick question :) so ... the constant "c" is not a constant ? the only letter i remember, ever since its only three actually
'c' is constant: it is the speed of light in the vacuum. Not in any other medium :)
ah :)
the more i get the more complex it gets , so light going through a gas cloud will have a different speed which means the distance it travels is harder to calculate
actually, before i switch off, as i was eating i was thinking, if this means the speed of light is variable and also since an absolute vacuum is mostly something that exists only in theory as there's always some kind of matter present, does that mean a foton shooting from "the center" towards earth would have a variable speed, like if it has to go through a place with more matter like on of those nebulae,
cosmic sized gas clouds other particles could (in theory) move faster through that part of space ? (yea i get weird thoughts at the funniest moments, but the fries and stew was good :)
just one last edit, i already turned it off but the word hit me : refraction ! spending all that time in blender lately and not even coming up with the word, assuming (by my limited knowledge fotons wont just shoot through the iron core of a planet but refraction is a fenomenon not just limited to liquid, its about matter, right ? so gas is matter (just trying to plot out my train here) so if gas is matter and light shoots through it you get this refraction just like you would get in liquid / water.
how do you factor in refraction across lightyears ? i know its off-topic to the post but it just popped into my head here and i can't imagine a better person to ask this :)
or is that all part of how gravity bends light since the force is related to the amount of matter (mass?) that's around
The intergalactical medium is a good vacuum. There is very little matter in there. In fact, the universe is mostly empty, except at very well located points so that light travels at 'c'.
Concerning refraction, it always occur at the interface of different media. Since there is not that many of such interfaces in the universe, we are save. Gravity is what bends the trajectory of light.
yes but gravity depends on mass being present so a cosmic cloud of gas must have quite some to it , no ? and "mostly empty" does that count as vacuum, is it REALLY empty ? then that's where the dark matter hides ?
so its basically not empty ... it contradicts itself again , if you had like 1 million cubic lightyears of whats seen as vacuum it would still hold an amount of matter, right ? even if maybe so light that it barely dents spacetime maybe over lightyears it would bend a ray of light, if ever so slightly ? unless there's a treshold at which fotons dont react to it ? i mean below it ?