Tritium update

ng).

lar places.

o arrive.

heavy water,

ound it).

sensitive

c etc.

Hi Jan, I once asked a 'neutrino' physicist if he could make a cheap apparatus (say ~$10k) that would have a 50% chance of detecting one neutrino in a year. The answer was no.. unless he could put it next to a nuclear reactor. I think neutrino's are 'devilishly' hard to detect.

George H.

places.

arrive.

heavy water,

it).

sensitive

etc.

The answer was negative just because he didn't know ATM that he'd just have to plug into Jan's brain...

On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Mar 2012 06:25:23 -0700 (PDT)) it happened George Herold wrote in :

I have met some 'physicists' and did not ask them about anything, LOL :-)

On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:04:14 +0100) it happened Fred Bartoli wrote in :

Well, in my opinion 19XX and 20XX physics so far strongly reminds me of the Greek water wind and fire as the elements physics. Be aware that nothing has ever come from ever bigger 'accelerators' that has helped humanity in any way as to: make a better weapon, make a new energy source, make better communications. It is a self-serving industrial complex, where 'Einstein's math repeating parrots' are employed in some sort of social project. An industrial complex very much like MIC (military industrial complex). Really, only a complete retarded idiot would start a project like ITER to build a fusion plant that costs billions and does not even break even, the 'national ignition facility' that will not produce energy either, and should be ignited on the spot, a LIGO experiment that cannot detect any gravity waves and never will, and the list is much longer, The morons will ask for a machine the size of the universe to shoot some billiard balls if they can get the money, only to claim that the NEXT accelerator will detect the God particle, and the theory of everything that reveals the true origin of the universe (Literal quote). Press report after press report of total crap, based on total wrong theories, calculated to the extreme with equations that in no way have any bearing on - or relation to reality, their God being some ancient Einstein who himself wrote that we should not use his equations as the ultimate truth (freely translated). But that is all they learned, do some sums, and they support each other in that, the club gets funded by poor people who really think those guys are scientists while they are in reality complete brain dead morons,

So, as for that you can ask any body in the street, and the chance that hat person will give a better answer as to reality is at least 50%. It always reminds me of the earth was flat people, and the sun orbits the earth. they were funded and politically supported and even killed anybody who tried to bring some sanity in that crap.

Sure, it supports a big electronic industry, created jobs, and maybe brings some advances in electronic design. But really, all the CERN tunnels are good for is bomb shelters. Sure I may be wrong, but so far, for anybody who has followed my postings in sci.physics over the years, EVERY single prediction I have made has come true, What are the predictions based on? Logical reasoning. And that seems to lack with those who you refer to as scientists.

So, if I were you I would play down your tune a bit, it may well backfire.

It seems as in the last few hundred years science in the form of playing with magnets and EM radiation has made some advances, in a short time, it is almost like evolution where we did see it seems a lot of new life forms in a very short time appear on the earth, large diversity, we now see a lot of gadgets (or whatever you want to call those) appear in a short time. It is almost if 'life' or living organisms at that ancient time found a way to self modify DNA and make some new designs... in the same way we now make some electronic things, however it is only a very small aspect although people would really like to think that we are advancing. From the viewpoint of life, how and in what sort of creature it manifests probably makes little difference. It is that ego thing that makes us think we are the crown of creation or whatever, the same ego thing that put the earth at the center and that assumes only one big bang with us in it, one planet with life and blah blah blah. It is an old tune: You know nothing is too easy a way to describe it, but really for life it probably makes no difference if it manifests in a mosquito, a dinosaur, or a human bean (or being). From that POV (of life) we may not be best equipped to carry it forward, and our technology, that we so proudly look upon is very much like a snail would look upon its little house and feels superior to the ones that crawl about without one. Neither does have to be the thing life will choose to carry on. If you look at it that way there is nothing we really know about what life really is, and why it chooses the forms it does, where it originated and how, and even it if can be understood by a couple of thousand connected neurons, something we are so proud of, that brain. In fact, without a mechanism that transcends our simple model of neurons it can be mathematically shown that we cannot understand anything, So, I personally think a human being or some other organism is part of - and connected to a much larger entity, not really autonomous in that way, and can perceive things that science has not even touched on. Even the fact that you can think about anything is just a simulation in your head. The most stupid thing I did read in the past week was an 'scientific' article that stated that their simulations 'proved' something, no it was not global warming. So what is a simulation other then a model with some simple formulas that as Einstein pointed out is neither a complete description of reality, nor should it be taken for one, or be used to 'prove' things as it is incomplete by design. Have fun.

And you asked one of them? Oh me oh my

The story of Ray Davis, and the neutrino is very interesting.

He spent a good fraction of his career measuring the few solar netruinos captured in dry cleaning fluid. Always about 1/3 the expected number. IIRC he was getting about 7 per year... Really remarkable man to stick with it for so long. There was a nice science show about it on NOVA here in the states a few years back.

George H.

On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:15:11 -0700 (PDT)) it happened George Herold wrote in :

Interesting

A better neutrino, or anti-neutroni detector would be cool.... :-)

rge

ap

xt

"A better neutrino, or anti-neutroni detector would be cool...."

Yeah, Plenty of smart people have no doubt thought about the problem. No easy methods to date.

George H.

On a sunny day (Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:58:40 -0700 (PDT)) it happened George Herold wrote in :

I have a few ideas that I will try. Already did some testing, Then stopped as I felt I was going the CERN way, so to speak, ever bigger and more expensive. Just let it sink in for a while. Now I have a different angle perhaps.

Hi,

Go smaller and cheaper! :) Also high frequency is good. Also I was reading about neutrinos not being effected by electromagnetism however they will respond to gravity and interact with the "weak force", and this force is also responsible for the radioactive decay of subatomic particles. So really if you have a radioactive decay source, it should decay differently depending on the concentration of neutrinos, and this varies on earth seasonally. I think there was a Russian physicist who did an experiment on this, but it would be good to check with other neutrino sources besides seasonal sun based neutrino ones.

cheers, Jamie

Hi,

You can probably calculate the neutrino mass too, by how much it effects the weak force, and how much it changes the radioactive decay rate!

cheers, Jamie