Read on Twitter
OK, so, I& #39;ve seen a lot of the "NASA detects parallel universe" stuff going around
I& #39;ve spent the last ~2 years of grad school investigating these detections, and wanted to provide a bit of background and clarification
(1/n)
I& #39;ve spent the last ~2 years of grad school investigating these detections, and wanted to provide a bit of background and clarification
(1/n)
ANITA, a detector that flies in Antarctica, detected some strange signals. These signals are hard (but not impossible) to remedy with our current models of physics
(2/n)
(2/n)
Why?
Because the detections made it look like a very high energy particle (the elusive neutrino) traveled through the entire Earth. BUT, neutrinos with this much energy aren& #39;t expected to do this, they should crash into things along the way
(3/n)
Because the detections made it look like a very high energy particle (the elusive neutrino) traveled through the entire Earth. BUT, neutrinos with this much energy aren& #39;t expected to do this, they should crash into things along the way
(3/n)
So, here come the weird ideas.
Scientists try to come up with ways of modifying our understanding of physics to make these detections more plausible. SOME of these require bizarre beyond the standard model ideas, like the one in the news
(4/n)
Scientists try to come up with ways of modifying our understanding of physics to make these detections more plausible. SOME of these require bizarre beyond the standard model ideas, like the one in the news
(4/n)
However, there are some COMPLETELY non-exotic explanations as well. These include:
(1) Astrophysics (see a recent paper by myself and others like @IbrahimSafa1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.01737 )
(2)">https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.... Systematics (which basically means something unaccounted for in the experiment)
(5/n)
(1) Astrophysics (see a recent paper by myself and others like @IbrahimSafa1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.01737 )
(2)">https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.... Systematics (which basically means something unaccounted for in the experiment)
(5/n)
Lately, some of the systematic explanations have looked really promising. These include things like weird features in Antarctic ice that could distort the signal of otherwise innocuous cosmic rays
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.091102
(6/8)">https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstr...
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.091102
(6/8)">https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstr...
For a great summary of the ANITA detections and some implications of the physics, see this article ( https://icecube.wisc.edu/news/view/709 )">https://icecube.wisc.edu/news/view... by the very talented @OKeefeMadeleine
(7/8)
(7/8)
And finally, for a quick explanation of the physics mentioned in the paper in the news, see this great thread by @litgenstein https://twitter.com/litgenstein/status/1263257639074455552">https://twitter.com/litgenste...
