followed tags: 20
followed domains: 1
badges given: 11 of 15
member for: 969 days
Since around March IIRC, likely earlier. Until you complete your first hubwheel (those circles next to the your username on navbar) and earn your first badge or get promoted by someone or someone will badge your comment you are forbidden from posting (no +post on navbar) and can't promote other users.
Glad I could help.
IIRC, models of wormholes aren't stable enough to not collapse when disturbed by passing of mass/energy. Not even passing through it, just the presence of other masses could potentially be enough to collapse a wormhole. Unless you want to use some fancy exotic matter with negative energy density/yet-to-be-discovered interaction to construct them out of it in the first place, then I'll concede my point as moot and go poop on some other party.
Toilet paper? At least that's the image description on Imgur says.
Wouldn't it exacerbate shear stress from things like soil movement?
I met with the student that I'm supposed to supervise/mentor this year. Apparently, I was recommended by the professor who was mentoring me during my freshman year. It feels ludicrous, dreadful and I'm still shaking off the initial stress.
Otherwise, I feel like I awaken from a very deep sleep. I'm still in awe of our analytical chemistry lab and already picked up all my books and whatnot for this semester from the library. Thinking of joining one of the student research associations but can't make my mind which.
Δm² is problematic because upper bound for sterile neutrino mass is something like 10^13 TeV and lower bound is "not exactly zero". Plus keep in mind that I cut everything down to obtain a first-order approximation and then used it on a wide range of values like a dumbass.
- Anyway, I dunno. One of the cruxes of my stance is trusting that the authors considered everything, which is a big scientific no-no.
- It sounds like even if you assume that a chirality change or flavor violation occurred just before the particle would have emerged out of the south pole.
When the problem is considered from a perspective of mass eigenstates, the flavour can change in a distance that's roughly proportional to 2E/|Δm²|where Δm² is a difference between squared masses/mass eigenvalues of transitioning neutrino. If I didn't make a mistake in my back of the envelope calculations, then at those energies it's at an order of tens of meters. EDIT: Scratch the last sentence. I used a bunch of possible values and considering the possible range for masses it's basically a meaningless figure. Sorry!
But when considering your question as a whole, I'm less convinced of my guesses. I only considered what could happen to neutrinos at that energy and what could explain it simply (thus considering neutrinos as Dirac and not Majorana particles). I hadn't yet tried to guesstimate my way through the whole problem.
- I'm not a particle guy.
Same here. I'm happy about it.
Apart from possibly making neutrino into a Dirac particle (to account for a possible chirality flip changing sterile neutrinos into active ones), I wonder if it could be explained by lepton flavour violation leading to a change in neutrino type/behaviour. AFAIK that's approaching the energy range where something like that could be considered. But that's just one big messy speculation on my part.