AI and Physics: Neutrinos

The recent development of AI presents challenges, but also great opportunities. In this series I will discuss possible AI applications:
One important field to fix is neutrino physics...

Mind also my backup channel:

[Quroxify]

Recently I posited a question to chatgpt. The question was:
"Due to the fact that neutrinos are created in nearly every nuclear reaction, and neutrinos rarely if ever interact with anything, why isn't the universe overflowing with neutrinos?"
Answer from chat GPT:
"While neutrinos are indeed produced in various nuclear reactions, they interact very weakly with matter. Most neutrinos pass through the universe without interacting, making them challenging to detect. The vast majority of neutrinos created in the universe continue to travel through space without significant interactions contributing to the difficulty in detecting their overwhelming presence."
So I would conclude that AI cannot reason this out logically. The reason is that the source of AI is based on a mountain of literature that supports opinions rather than evidence.
I'm with you 100% about taking a look at the data rather than the opinions. There is much to do and AI is a great tool.
Thanks

[cloudswrest]

There's much evidence for something you can call "neutrinos", both direct and indirect, though not necessarily all the details.
1. Conservation of angular momentum. Neutron =1/2. Proton+electron+(n) photons all add to a whole number.
2. Detected burst from supernova 1987a
3. Sending message via neutrinos (albeit at low bandwidth) from nuclear reactor to underground neutrino detector.
BTW, allegedly ~3% of the energy of a fission reaction is carried away by neutrinos. So for a 1GW reactor that's 30 If that was EMR all the staff nearby would be immediately cooked to a crisp!

[brynduffy]

I have yet to see the "intelligence"in AI algorithms.
It always seems to simply be a regurgitation of that which has been published, mindless regurgitation.

[ChrisLehtoF]

Thank you Alexander! I too am hopeful and optimistic AI will analyze without human bias and come to new fundamental understanding. Huge fan, thanks for your work

[sillysad]

i called standard model "Epicycles" 10 years ago!

[donaldkasper]

I would have loved to have been that grad student coming up with that paper. "Hey professor, I found a new particle". "Wow, cool kid, where is your data?" "Data? There is no data. It doesn't interact with matter. But I have this set of really cool equations that proves its existence". "Wow, how impressive. Publish your results". "There are no results, professor".

[leofun]

We definetly should to repeat all those experiments. But we don't have AI for the physics, only large ML was built pretty successful, and it's not for fundamental sciences at all.

[graemenicholls]

Again I answer this fully in my model. Neutrinos are just radiation, but specific radiation from the neutron's dimensional zone. This is the key reason is that they are different from gamma rays which reference the nucleus structure and different dimensions. This explains the "Particle" trace as it is detected in these tanks - it is not a particle but the radiation referencing the electron orbitals of several atoms in a row. As a side note my model also explains why x-rays are not absorbed by lower elements in the periodic table. it is everything to do with how the nucleus is constructed.
Again, Alexander please get in touch - my model answers many, if not all your questions you keep positing on your channel.
Thank you

[barabbasrosebud]

It’s good to hear someone challenge the existence of, though it be a dangerous heresy; the arbitrary, yet orthodox, superstitious, religious belief in the divine, immaculately conceived, miraculous, impossible to empirically verify, Paraclete like, supernatural, neutrino. Amen.

[hatac]

I doubt AI is needed the problem is that all the data is not in the same place and freely accessible. Us normal intelligence meat-bags could have a go. AI is just neural nets and modeling software. Its always limited by the programmers knowledge and biased by their selection of weights. What do you reward the AI for doing? The choice of rewards decides the out comes.

[fouadudh]

Neutrino was postulated by Pauli to account for the observed momentum conservation violation in the beta decay. But wait a minute, the law of conservation of momentum is just a consequence of the Newton's third law, to which nuclear interactions are not necessarily bound to. Even Newton's first law doesn't hold for an electron, given the way it moves across a double slit. Something more fundamental is certainly at play.

[rtarz]

I wouldn't trust AI anymore than I'd trust the corrupted peer review system and academia in general. The greed of the world has taken it to the point of having to review it all over again. Trust and integrity is everything to science.

[hollaadieewaldfeee]

“We have verified your results completely. It seems to me now that there can be absolutely no doubt that you were completely correct in assuming that beta radiations are primarily inhomogenous. But I do not understand this result at all.” Lisa Meitner to Charles Ellis. 20.07.1929.
Lisa confirms the difference between the measurement, 0.35 MeV, and the calculation, 1.05 MeV, of 0.7 MeV energy release during radium decay. But even she does not doubt the validity of the SRT equations; which are unscientific nonsense anyway! And in a flash, a new particle is postulated: The “neutrino”, which should somehow carry away this 0.7 MeV;-)

[SergiuCosminViorel]

you are not mistaken. neutrinos, even though they are real, like real something, they are not particles, they are particle spread. not in the sense of scattering particles, but in the sense that one particle spreads itself in certain ways. neutrinos are not real particles. as long as they exist, so to speak, they are still parts of other real particles. that is what i call particle spread, or particle spreads.

[TheShorterboy]

the lack of resolution to fundamental issues says what we are back to Epicycles but there are too many careers involved and too much institutional investment for change to happen

[bryansanctuary]

There are about 10^{22} stars in the universe with an average neutrino flux of 10^{50} neutrinos/second/star. Assume that production is constant for the last 14 billion years = 4.42 \times 10^{17} sec. With no neutrino sinks, 4.42 \times 10^{89} neutrinos presently exist in the universe. Assume each has energy of one Mev=1 amu= 1.66 \times 10^{-27} kg/amu. (take it as one ev if you like), then the present mass of neutrinos in the Universe is
7.3 \times 10^{59} tons. This is considerably more than the present estimated mass of the Univers, e which is about 2 \times 10^{49} tons. Either neutrinos have sinks, or they do not exist.

[MrVibrating]

What might be the alternate interpretations for conservation of neutron spin? They're obviously not bosonic, yet ½ + ½ = 1, implying neutrons must maintain two discrete axes, effectively making them binary rather than singular particles..?

[dennisbailey]

If Neutrinos do not interact with any matter, and keep travelling at the speed of light, they would travel outside any boundary of the Universe, if it had one, and keep travelling, creating new space??Or do they bounce off any boundary, and continue to bounce like billiard balls within the Universe.Live long and prosper.😊

[walterbrownstone]

What is a neutrino and why is it not a photon.

[guytech]

Alex: You cannot have real physics without critics!