Feeds

back to article Tiny, invisible EXTRATERRESTRIAL INVADERS appear at South Pole

Scientists at the South Pole have detected a collection of warp speed neutrinos from deep space that could help explain the origins of the universe. A team from the mighty IceCube telescope laboratory in Antarctica will reveal their findings in tomorrow's Science journal. The experts' 28 intergalactic subatomic particles were …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Mushroom

WTF ???

If the report is right then particles up to 1200 TeV were detected - this is equivalent to more than the mass of 1,200,000 neutrons (or protons).!!!

How could a neutrino achieve that energy ?

Even if somehow all the energy of a collision of a uranium atom with an antimatter uranium atom could be put into one neutrino, this would still be less than one thousandth of the energy of this particle.

1
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: WTF ???

It is also about 2 orders or magnitude more than can be achieved at the LHC collision point once it reopens.

We observed 28 neutrino candidate events (two previously reported), substantially more than the Formula expected from atmospheric backgrounds, and ranging in energy from 30 to 1200 TeV. With the current level of statistics, we did not observe significant clustering of these events in time or space, preventing the identification of their sources at this time.

Yep, that's 0.0002 Joule. In a neutrino. What the hell?

My tax money at work! More like this!

3
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: WTF ???

How could a neutrino achieve that energy ?

By travelling really, really fast. A massive star collapsing into a black hole*, or a star being swallowed by a galactic mass black hole should do the trick.

* The bulk of the energy released by a supernova is in the form of neutrinos.

4
0

Re: WTF ???

A massive star collapsing into a black hole, or a star being swallowed by a galactic mass black hole should do the trick.

Although since both involve a strong gravitational field that the particle has to exit I always wonder what sort of energy it must have had when created and ejected!

0
0
Silver badge

We should have neutrino shotguns for this kind of deal.

I don't think black hole shenanigans are sufficient for this kind of action.

While supernovas can kick charge particles, in particular iron nuclei to considerable cosmic-ray energies over long distances of plasma surfing, the neutrino cannot be gripped by electromagnetic forces.

Once created, it's off.

And neutrino spectra from supernovae stay safely below 90 MeV AFAIK.

1
0

Re: WTF ???

can't you see the obvious? this means as the stevie hawking robot will tell you we NOW need to spend trillions of worthless dollars not just billions of worthless dollars on new atom smashers to understand that we have even more very, very, important questions we have so no one will believe that God had anything to do with nuthin' -@--@-

actually, http://hereitis.ws !!!!!!!!! give me some of that old time religion!!!!!!!!

0
12
Bronze badge

Hum

Having collected the particles

Hum, it'll be interesting to see these elusive little neutrino fellas in a bottle for once.

;-)

6
0
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Hum

Clearly you need Dr Who's patent neutronium bottle, ultracooled.

1
0

Re: Hum

"> Having collected the particles

Hum, it'll be interesting to see these elusive little neutrino fellas in a bottle for once.

;-)"

:)

Yeah - i'm also intrigued by the "28 intergalactic subatomic particles, which were embedded within a cubic kilometre of polar ice"... presumably they just sort of fell out on the floor when the block was opened, and they had to scoop them up into the bottle.. that must have been a tricky lil'job and no mistake (especially if you had gloves on or no nails).

1
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Neurinos have mass,

although this has not been measured. It is therefore a massive relativistic particle and can approach but not reach the speed of light.

1
0
Joke

Re: Neurinos have mass,

Didn't even know they were Catholics!

(Courtesy Dan Brown:Angels and Demons.)

10
0
Silver badge

Re: Neurinos have mass,

It's the matter of an old schism!

2
0

Why didn't the writer explain the title?

The writer never said anything about extraterrestrials: neither seriously or seriously funny.

It would have been easy to either joke that neutrinos are extraterrestrials somehow.

Or maybe look at the possibility of the neutrinos being made by extraterrestrials.

Instead the dots were left unconnected.

How uncool.

0
4
(Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

Re: Why didn't the writer explain the title?

Clue is in "originated from outside the Solar System".

C.

3
0

my TOE

its scientifically obvious we will now need trillions (adjusted for inflation) to build more powerful accelerators

(atom smashers) and take every bright and gifted individual that is available to look into these deep and meaningful areas in our never ending quest for the ultimate theory of everything.

well, not me. i am too busy eating pizza, cheeseburgers, and BLTs with Franks Hot Sauce!!!!!!! MY GOD I THANK YOU FOR THIS AND NOW MAYBE YOU WILL MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO AFFORD SOME CIGARETTES AND MICHIGAN BEER? YOU LOVE ME GOD AND I LOVE YOU AND ALL MY NEIGHBORS AND WISH THE SAME BLISS FOR THEM!!!!!!! amen kirk

0
6
Silver badge
Coat

You wish me to have Michigan beer ?

I'd rather have a Duvel, thank you.

3
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Science porn

Up with this kind of thing.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

Re. neutrinos

I have theorised that extremely high energy neutrinos might be produced by naturally occurring particles interacting with clusters of supermassive rotating black holes.

Essentially the edge of the black hole acts like a monster particle accelerator, allowing the protons and antiprotons to collide at velocities that simply cannot occur anywhere else

Where the proton/antiproton streams from adjacent black holes collide you get intermittent bursts of neutrinos at the energy levels seen.

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: Re. neutrinos

"Where the proton/antiproton streams from adjacent black holes collide you get intermittent bursts of neutrinos at the energy levels seen."

Yep, sounds like a lousy neighborhood to be in.

But, a totally cool one to observe from a great distance. ;)

0
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: adjacent black holes

We've already enough trouble finding ONE black hole, and you want them to come in pairs ?

Kids these days.

Harumph.

2
0

Who to truly believe

Scientist haven't even physically seen an atom (even with all the technology they have at hand).

Now they saying they have found particles even smaller than an atom?????

There will those that say, but we utilise the findings in the maths.

And I say to you, all man made ideas and algorithms.

If one "lived" on Mars (or any other planet) the maths would have different outcomes due to the frequency output of that planet.

If one wanted to "sense" life on a different planet, one would have to be in "tune" to that planet's frequency.

Man's laws apply only to man on man's earth, apply man's laws to the universe and it would not last a nano second.

Science says believe in what we say, even though we have not physically seen an atom.

Religion also says believe in what we say, even though we have not physically seen "god".

So who and what does one put their "faith" in?

Faith is belief without doubt in the inner consciousness.

So the only logical answer is, believe in one's own self.

2
20

Re: Who to truly believe

I forgot to add that "inner growth" overcomes gravity's effects.

Because how else would anything "grow".

To overcome a force one utilises a greater force.

2
8
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: Who to truly believe

"To overcome a force one utilises a greater force."

Unfamiliar with the concept of judo then?

As for the rest....

4
0
FAIL

Re: Who to truly believe

You've obviously gone cuckoo in the head!!! These are not man made laws but man's observation of universal laws of physics that are equally valid on Mars as they are on Earth. It is in fact "God's laws" that are man made as God is a figment of man's imagination. You don't have to have seen something personally to know it exists. As for this nonsense about the "frequency of the planet", what dope are you on? Or rather what planet are you on?

7
0

Re: Who to truly believe

I agree, but faith in one's self is only faith as far as you know it, if you truly believed without a shadow of a doubt could you fly? Could pigs fly? Lol

Our limitations are taught, as long as there is doubt, about anything, it is not possible - so to believe 100% without a shadow of doubt that you will eventually die, does this belief alone ultimately cause you to die?

Your reality is entirely within your own head, we have no way of knowing the following:-

1. Is what we are experiencing actually what is out there?

2. Is anyone else conscious or do they just appear to be?

3. When we are not there, as a conscious observer, does it continue to exist?

So really you could argue that anything you are reading/experiencing is actually a manifestation of your own beliefs.......but do you have the power to influence that?!

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Who to truly believe

http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2013/05/30/atom-by-atom/

Careful now, science ahead!

1
0

Re: Who to truly believe

I think you misread the instructions in the letter you received you actually need to regularly "sign the register" not "sign into The Register"

4
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Who to truly believe

Your message is in itself extremely strong evidence that the laws of Physics are substantially correct.

Not by its content but by its existence.

If the Universe did not work in accordance with the laws of Physics then modern electronics would be utterly impossible in many different ways.

That includes the computer you typed your message on, the server which holds it, and the network that distributes it.

1
0

Re: Who to truly believe

The universe doesn't work in accordance to the "laws of physics".

As I said, apply man's "physics" to the universe it would not last a nano second.

Make your own model, punch all what you know into a computer and see how long that model of the universe would last.

Because the macro doesn't work for the micro.

Religion, science, nor philosophy can explain how the "one" came about.

To say it came from nothing or it has always been there, doesn't truly explain/answer.

To even suggest it came from nothing, says that it was lurking there all along.

All has to be taken into account (the whole), not just what suits to make the model work.

Because all (the whole) is making the actual work.

We will all know soon enough when the Apocalypse happens (apocalypse meaning- revealing what was once hidden).

Bag me if you want, but no matter what, the whole will remain the whole, only the sum of it's parts differ from time to time.

A.E.I.O.U - Absolute Energy (=) Input, Output, Utilization

And if one of anything is the I.O.U of AE, as is the next one.

All is the I.O.U of AE for A.E.I.O.U.

1
3

Re: Who to truly believe

How do you know I am truly wrong, have you done any tests on Mars?

Because if one did, the maths "laws" would be according to the findings of what one observes on Mars (if one lived there).

I can guarantee you that the "frequency" of Earth differs from the frequency of Mars (or any other planet).

It has been said that to know the secrets of the universe think energy, frequency, vibration/reverberation.

If one was to reverberate at the same rate of another, (say a glass panel for instance) one would/could pass through it.

If the Philadelphia experiment is to be believed, this would explain why some of the personnel were found fused to the ship, after the magnetic coil was shut off (as all were and had an equal vibrational frequency at the time of the coil being activated).

0
4

Re: Who to truly believe

The problem being is most are taught with a curriculum to "remember and repeat" and not to "think and know".

Those that question the supposed norm are ridiculed (as I have on this site by others).

But if not one truly knows the "meaning of life", how can any answer be wrong?

Humans utilize "linear time" yet, scientist know that time doesn't truly exist and further yet they continue to use it in their math.

That is what scientist cannot do in any laboratory or with their math, to create the sense of existence and the will to exist.

I read a good analogy when it comes to existence and who we think we are.

1. Ask a person who do they think they are, and they will naturally look at themselves and say "I am me".

2. Get them to close their eyes and picture something in their mind (dog, cat, or what ever).

3. Ask that person then, who is looking at the image they conjured, and they will answer to you "I am".

4. You then ask them (while their eyes are still closed) "who then is you"?

1
4
Bronze badge
WTF?

Re: Who to truly believe

If one "lived" on Mars (or any other planet) the maths would have different outcomes due to the frequency output of that planet.

I think that if this were the case and, say, pi were an integer then the Mars Rover's wheels would have fallen off my now.

0
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Who to truly believe

I can guarantee you that the "frequency" of Earth differs from the frequency of Mars (or any other planet).

Enlighten me. In terms of Hertz, what is the frequency of Earth and and how does this compare with the frequency of the other planets?

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge

Re: Who to truly believe

Marino don't you have a CNN article to troll or something? Yes science is all a myth. After all its just a coincidence that for the last 60 years unlike the 100,000+ years before that half of our children no longer die before the age of 5.

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

Sorry but,

WTF?

That is all.

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

A circle can be created utilizing only straight lines (I can draw a diagram to prove this, but unfortunately I cannot upload it onto this comments page).

One only has to look at what the ancient's achieved (which man today can only guess how they achieved it and would have a very hard time to replicate, even with today's technology/machines).

So they obviously knew something that modern man doesn't or have we have forgotten (because those in power are not wanting to teach this knowledge in fear of losing control of the masses).

It is hard to get out of our thoughts what we have been taught, but if one can break through that way of thinking... then who knows?

The easiest way the enslave the masses is to withhold/deny one true knowledge.

1
1

Re: Who to truly believe

And 100 years ago + cancer used to be 1 in 1000, now 1 in 2.

If science truly knew the truth, why is science killing more humans more than ever.

One would think that by now there would be no such thing as disease, cancer, or for that matter death.

With the combined knowledge on all subjects (which numbers into the millions of years and for some billions of years) older than man is, yet here we are arguing if what one says is true or not.

And if one was to combine all the years of all the humans on this planet it would outnumber the age of the universe by tenfold, so how does science explain all that "time" matter.

1
1

Re: Who to truly believe

Open your eyes and all you see (sense) is mine (mine = IN ME).

Close your eyes and all you see (sense) is mine (IN ME).

1
0

Re: Who to truly believe

For those of you didn't believe me that man's laws are wrong, just read, MY EYES! Earth engulfed by BRIGHTEST EVER killer gamma-ray burst.

This article is also on The Register.

I hate to say it but, I told you all so.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Who to truly believe

Knowing "the whole" implies that any one person could know about everything in existence. Since this isn't possible, then your logic would indicate it's impossible to create a model about anything. If it's impossible to create a model of anything, then why should I believe your model for absolute energy? Since no one person could have ever known "the whole" on this planet, then how could any model for "absolute energy" have possibly been derived?

You think that man's science is incorrect for the rest of the universe. Is it so impossible to believe that a man could observe a phenomenon on this planet, and that those observations could lead to a set of equations that are universally true? Do you have so little faith in mankind that you would believe it's impossible for us to deduce even one single law of physics, on any level?

If you believe in yourself so much, then why don't you believe in mankind a little more? You yourself are a man, so implying that mankind is so incapable of deducing the laws of the universe would also imply that your own laws are equally as fallible.

Furthermore, do you even know what the word "frequency" means? It means the number of occurrences of a repeating event over TIME, a concept that you implied should not be used because scientists said it "doesn't exist". If scientists can't use time to explain things, then why should I believe your explanations that also involve time?

If these planets have a "frequency", then exactly what event is reoccurring. What is oscillating? Could you please explain what the frequency is a measure of in this instance, because I can't figure it out.

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

If that was the case for Judo, there wouldn't be such a thing (or a need) as weight classes in competition, now would there.

1
0

Re: Who to truly believe

I guess you haven't heard of the "Schumann resonance"

With regards to drugs, they change the electrical frequencies delivered to the neurons, hence why one sees the world differently.

Even some of the greatest minds experimented with drugs to get their theories.

1
0
Stop

Re: Who to truly believe

Marino keep babbling on. Don't worry the men in white coats will be coming for you soon. Then you can feel the frequency of the electricity as it convulses through your brain in the ECT you'll be getting! You are so sad and so deluded!

0
0
Pirate

Re: Who to truly believe

There is no evidence that what you say about cancer and deaths is correct. Firstly 100 years ago they didn't have the resources to detect cancers and they were under reported. Secondly the general death rate was much higher so people died before the effects of cancer kicked in. Thirdly the population was smaller so fewer people died from cancers. Finally as you don't believe in the concept of time, today's deaths are yesterday's deaths! 1 in 2 implies that 50% of deaths are due to cancer! Absolute nonsense! Anyway, science is not killing anyone, your lunacy is!

0
0
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Who to truly believe

Marino, I've just taken the trouble to upvote all of your posts in this thread for successfully trolling the Reg commentard community to such an extent. Truly a trolling worthy of the best of 4chan. And that's even taking into account Poe's Law, because I'm certain nobody capable of entering a username and password would actually believe the new-age quasi-religious tripe you just posted!

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

If you are unaware "time " is man made ideology.

Did time exist before man walked the earth?

If you think evolution is always ongoing where are the half man half monkey's, or are you one of them?

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

We do the know the whole (because we are I.O.U of the whole), those now in control have suppressed this knowledge.

Because if all had "the knowledge" no one could have any control or any power over the next.

Earth has an output "frequency" of 7.83 Hz if you must know, because you can't do your own research.

And if you haven't already figured out what exactly the planets do, they orbit, hence an event reoccurring (as are the seasons on this planet).

And the flak I am enduring for my comments.

And if you read all my comments, punch all man's laws into a computer model of a universe and "time" how long it would last.

I would love to know your answer, and if I'm wrong I will publicly admit it.

And if you recall my answer was, not even a nano second of man based time.

Ignorance is forgetfulness, so I do forgive you for that.

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

There is evidence to increased cancer and deaths, you just need to dig deeper (if you are unaware statistics/ratio are calculated by numbers on ground).

In today's world, there is no MONEY in keeping people healthy, Big pharma is making a killing supplying drugs, and they are the first to knock on a recently qualified doctor's door to push their drugs, wake up.

Bill Gates had publicly said the worlds population needs to be culled by 80% and the best way is through sterilization of the population, and what is his new venture, vaccinations.

Again, do some research.

But I must admit, less humans means less money for the elite, so the logic there doesn't compute.

The majority are brainwashed, because how can (in a mostly democratic society) the 1% rule the 99% when supposedly majority rules????

And one would have to be truly brainwashed, to pay an entity to tell you what you can and can't do.

Hence education and the majority walk around like pre-programmed robots and believe what they are told and taught.

A truly educated human questions what he/she is taught, and not just accept.

If one cannot think for themselves, perhaps culling is the best thing.

But not to worry, your "matter" will go to good use, it will get recycled for the remainder (of the sum of the whole) to feed off.

And again I must say, I forgive you for your ignorance.

Perhaps you can answer one question for me, How did the very first of any trade/practice, gets it's qualifications when there was no teacher/school to begin with so as to give a qualification???????????

0
0

Re: Who to truly believe

Steve Roper, I must truly believe without a doubt, to even have the balls to write what I am writing.

How many can or could say the same, I probably can count them on one finger (which finger, I'll leave that to one's imagination).

Once upon a time, all thought the world was flat, the earth was the center of the universe (or the very least the solar system), and America's NSA didn't spy on it's own civilians.

But hey most humans still believe paper money is actually worth something.

"Time" will only tell, if I am wrong.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.