What are main implications of recently confirmed non-zero neutrino mass for particle physics/cosmology?
1. What adjustment to mass of dark matter needs to be made to compensate for finite neutrino mass?
2. How reliable is the recently published neutrino data?
Terry - curious
The main implication is that the standard model needs a few extra terms in include neutrino mass inetarctions. It helps out quite a bit, as we really need neutrinoes to have mass in order to solve a couple of outstanding issues with stellar astrophysics. Nothing really has to change, since the better theories floating around all had neutrino masses already.
Actually, this was a confirmation experiment, we first showed that the neutrino had mass a number of years ago, this recent finding was an independant recomfirmation of this through a differnt experimental method.
As far as Dark matter, nothing has to change, neutrinoes, even massive ones are not massive enogh to account for all the dark matter out there, and have the wrong type of motion to fit what we observe. We need dark matter to be "cold" (moving slowly), neutrinoes are "hot" (they move really fast).
The data is quite reliable, it comes from established laboratories, and all the work has undergone (or is undergoing) very stringent peer-review.
Fatal Bazooka feat Yelle - Parle à ma main
|Ebay has returned a malformed xml response. This could be due to testing or a bug in the RSS2 Generator. Please check the support forums to see if there are any posts regarding recent RSS2 Generator bugs.
No items matching the keyword phrase "Main Mass" were found. This could be due to the keyword phrase used, or could mean your server is unable to communicate with Ebays RSS2 Server.
CURL error code = 28. (Operation timed out after 20000 milliseconds with 0 bytes received)
Filed under: Meteorites & Tektites