[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: Neutrinos


>>Recent research has indicated that neutrinos are NOT massless. (Best guess
>>upto now is 0.07 eV/c^2)
>>I added an article from AIP (June) at the end of this letter.
>Yes I know about those results, and if they were massless they wouldn't be
>useable as tachyons. Cramer suggested they might be tachyons if they had
>negative mass values. Aren't atmospheric anomaly neutrinos muon neutrinos

"Anomaly" neutrinos? I'm sorry, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.
(The neutrinos from the Sun and space aren't anomalous and are likely of
all 3 generations (electron-, muon-, taon-neutrinos).)

>>Any reason for a *coherent* beam? Do incoherent tachyons not transfer
>If neutrinos were tachyons they'd need to be produced in a coherent beam,
>else there'd be NO net thrust, aside from the slight absorption by the
>ship's structure. Neutrino reactions with the chlorine and other neutrino
>reactive atoms in our bodies would kill us before there was a useable thrust

Ah, coherent as in unidirectional. OK, that's right.

>Also note the report was of a mass DIFFERENCE between neutrino species, not
>the actual mass. The case is still open.

Ah yes I see, my interpretation of the 0.07 was incorrect.