Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!cleanfeed3-a.proxad.net!nnrp4-1.free.fr!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The HOAX of the neutrino invention. After 95 years don't know shit.
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Reply-To: jjlxa31@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2025 10:35:57 +0200
References: <0dd990630edbc9332716605722eb087a@www.novabbs.com> <67E8D34E.6DF1@ix.netcom.com> <67E8E44B.76F4@ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: De Ster
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.12.6)
Lines: 142
Message-ID: <67e9026d$1$12949$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Mar 2025 10:35:57 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.10.137.58
X-Trace: 1743323757 news-2.free.fr 12949 213.10.137.58:63735
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Bytes: 7484

The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> The Starmaker wrote:
> > 
> > rhertz wrote:
> > >
> > > In 1930 Wolfgang Pauli  proposed the existence of the neutrino (named in
> > > 1933 by Fermi) to solve the violation of energy conservation in beta
> > > decay (when a neutron turns into a proton and emits an electron).
> > > Scientists observed that the emitted electrons had varying energies,
> > > rather than a fixed value as expected. The neutrino was ALLEGEDLY
> > > detected experimentally by Cowan and Reines in 1956.
> > >
> > > The missing energy varied from 0.1 to 0.2 eV (millions of times lower
> > > than electrons at rest). Pauli assumed that neutrinos might be massless,
> > > like photons, and this kept in the '70s, with the Standard Model
> > > (1970s). Analysis from Solar Neutrinos (1960sâ•"2001) suggested that
> > > neutrinos oscillate, wich (de Broglie) require mass.
> > >
> > > Up to date, the neutinos mass is UNKNOWN. As neutrinos proved to be the
> > > JOKER CARD of particle physics, different types of neutrino emerged
> > > since its invention TO JUSTIFY the conservation of energy. All three of
> > > them were asigned a spin of 1/2 in the Standard Model, only for
> > > equations involving SMEP charged particles. They are; Electron neutrino
> > > (< 2.2 eV), Muon neutrino (< 0.17 eV) and Tau neutrino (< 15.5 MeV). The
> > > energies ARE STILL NOT KNOWN (so their mass, IF THEY HAVE IT AT ALL).
> > >
> > > Two collosal experiments have been developed to capture neutrinos, at
> > > the expense of tens of billions of USD. One of these collosus is the
> > > Japanese Super-Kamiokande (see attached pic), which uses ultrapure
> > > water. The other one is the IceCube arrangement, located inside the
> > > Antarctic ice. IceCube was designed to CAPTURE ultra-high-energy cosmic
> > > neutrinos, while the Super-K is designed to CAPTURE solar, atmospheric,
> > > and accelerator neutrinos, which are much less energetic.
> > >
> > > The concept behind the CAPTURE of neutrinos is strictly based on the
> > > emission of Cherenkov radiation (blue light flash), when they penetrate
> > > water or ice, because its speed would be faster than light in those
> > > enviroments, so they have to subside energy (Cerenkov discovered this
> > > 100 years ago).
> > >
> > > The PROBLEM with neutrinos is that they don't like to interact with
> > > matter. ALLEGEDLY (if neutrinos really exist), the probability to detect
> > > ONE NEUTRINO PER YEAR, at the Japanese Super-K is:
> > >
> > > ONE IN 10,000,000,000,000,000
> > >
> > > Or about 5,000 to 10,000 neutrinos "detected by the Cherenkov blue flash
> > > over 10^20 neutrinos per year entering into the Super-Kamiokande
> > > (Super-K). It means about 10 to 20 neutrinos per day.
> > >
> > > How the neutrinos "ARE DETECTED"?: Super-K uses a cylindrical stainless
> > > steel tank, 41.4 meters tall Ø 39.3 meters in diameter (like a 13-story
> > > building buried underground). It contains the inner  Super-K
> > > (36-meter-tall Ø 34-meter-diameter) is filled with 50,000-ton ultrapure
> > > water.
> > >
> > > Super-K uses 11,129 photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) to capture the
> > > Cherenkov blue flashes that form a cone of light as it decreases its
> > > speed at about 0.7c. The PMTs are extremely fragile and are placed side
> > > by side in all the internal surface. If one explodes, a chain reaction
> > > happens that destroy most of the other PMT.
> > >
> > > The PMT MUST BE SUPERSENSITIVE because they only can capture few photons
> > > of the light cone, as the neutrinos penetrates into the Super-K volume.
> > > The FLASH can happen at any depth, because neutrinos have to interact
> > > with binding energies in the nucleus of atoms to be detected. PMTs have
> > > few nanoseconds to detect the arrival times of photons. A solar neutrino
> > > (from the Sun) interacts in the water, creating an electron, which is
> > > the one that emits Cherenkov light, hitting about 100 PMTs. The output
> > > of the PMTs raise the energy close to 5 MeV, after which software
> > > processing complete the calculations.
> > >
> > > One additional narrative is the existence of antineutrinos, which are
> > > (allegedly) distinguished in the Super-K.
> > >
> > > The most important facts are:
> > >
> > > *  Neutrinos must have mass, but IT IS NOT KNOWN YET.
> > >
> > > * Only a difference in alleged masses of the three types of neutrinos is
> > > known, BUT ONLY BECAUSE the detected oscillations are different.
> > >
> > > * Since they are emitted (i.e. by the Sun), neutrinos change (mutate)
> > > from one type to the other (or scientists allege to).
> > >
> > > * The mutations are originated (as they say) due to mechanisms:
> > >
> > > **** Seesaw Mechanism: Heavy right-handed neutrinos suppress left-handed
> > > neutrino masses.
> > >
> > > *** Dirac vs. Majorana: If neutrinos are their own antiparticles
> > > (Majorana), their mass could arise from exotic processes.
> > >
> > > MY CONCLUSION: Physics needs that neutrinos REALLY EXIST, otherwise the
> > > law of conservation of energy is violated. How neutrinos are generated
> > > IS UNKNOWN. If neutrinos have mass or not IS UNKNOWN. Tens of billions
> > > of USD wasted for nothing, as the confusion in physics increase with
> > > each generation of geniuses proposing contradictory ideas. The existence
> > > of cosmic neutrinos is essential in astrophysics to FILL THE VOID in
> > > calculations. Also, in cosmology, their role is essential for such
> > > unproven theories like the BB.
> > >
> > > I smell a rotten fish around this.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, physicists making six figures plus expenses are more than
> > > happy, and have zero accountability.
> > >
> > > HOAX!
> > 
> > Neutrino is not a hoax...
> > 
> > it's simply..not real.
> > 
> > What Feynman would say is...guess gone wrong.
> > 
> > throw against the wall to see if it sticks
> > 
> > it sticks to cranks.
> > 
> > retards LOVE neutrinos
> > 
> > they have a picture of it on their wall
> > 
> > or in a fish bowl (without water)
> > 
> > science fiction wanna bees
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> lets not forget  Wolfgang Pauli is and has always been a crank...he
> believes in ESP, etc.

Sure, no better than Newton.

> it's very hard to tell the difference between a expert and a crank...

Indeed, it takes an expert,

Jan