If you had a reasonably cheap particle accelerator, one that could produce a high flux of few-GeV neutrinos, you could make yourself some real money.
-
Recent Posts
Archives
- December 2023
- December 2022
- September 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
Categories
- Aging
- Altitude adaptations
- Amerindians
- Archaic humans
- Ashkenazi Jews
- assortative mating
- Australian Aboriginals
- Book Reviews
- Bushmen
- Cold War
- Denisovans
- Dietary adaptations
- dysgenics
- Economics
- Education
- Eskimo
- European Prehistory
- Evolutionary Medicine
- Genetics
- Genghis -Khan effect
- GGS
- homo erectus
- Homosexuality
- Indo-European
- Linguistics
- Low-hanging Fruit
- Mangani
- Neanderthals
- Pygmies
- Skin color
- Speaking ill of the dead
- sub-Saharan Africans
- Uncategorized
- World War Two
Meta
?
Are you going to give us a hint how? I can’t imagine any other use than renting it out to replace more expensive particle accelerators.
You could perhaps use it for an accelerator-driven reactor, which would be neat, but I said “real money”, which should be a strong hint that the application I had in mind is fundamentally useless.
High finance.
My, have we fallen.
lead into gold?
Same here. What came to my mind was accelerator driven nuclear power (both fission and fusion) as well as, not as desirable, a potential for fission-less fusion bombs. Maybe one can make anti-matter with such a device.
Perhaps he is referring the the fact that several Nobels have been awarded for neutrino-related results, or perhaps that you could pretend to have developed practical nuclear fusion and suck in large amounts of venture financing to productize it.
Or perhaps he is referring to this:
From here:
Click to access neutrino_pamphlet.pdf
To practise alchemy.
One of the reasons neutrinos are so hard to detect is that they interact so little.
Maybe it can turn lead into gold.
Throw in a bunch of electrons as well and you might be able to turn titanium into calcium!
Neutrino generator + detector on opposite sides of the earth for faster communication (straight line rather than satellite or earth’s surface). Use this to make quicker financial decisions than your rivals. Profit.
The bit rate might be a bit low, even if you modulated the production of neutrinos.
That’s why you need high flux. And a better detector.
Ah, yes, that works. But you can’t generate an enormous profit, because the next guy will build one for the same NY-to-London route, or whatever. Eventually competition will drive the price you can charge down to just covering the capital and operating costs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_running
“Michaela Lewis, in his 2014 book, “Flash Boys”, describes frontrunning by High Frequency Trading Firms (HFT’s), who have located their servers geographically close to stock exchanges and skim a profit from the original investor. By using the HFT’s geographic advantage, they are able to capture knowledge of the investor’s intentions. The HFT server then executes it’s own trades on those same stocks first, driving up/down prices on buy/sell orders, to the disadvantage of the original investor.”
You only need one.
Stocks are traded with the fastest communications networks in the world. If yours was faster, you would make a lot of money.
That’s it.
That only works if you can modulate (and detect) fast enough.
Heh, maybe you could get people to walk through the beam and get that ghostly glow from all the Cherenkov radiation.
Particles with charge, or at least electric dipole, do produce Cherenkov radiation.
Neutrinos — do not.
Yes, but the neutrinos when interacting with charged particles which can subsequently produce Cherenkov radiation.
That’s one of the methods by which neutrinos are detected. See here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_detector
Tear all the copper out of it and take it to a scrapyard.
http://www.larryniven.net/stories/roentgen.shtml
If past experience is any guide, you can get a number of people to panic about a neutrino beam passing 80 miles below their homes.
Neutrinos pretty much pass through anything without stopping but they do interact, though weakly. Perhaps you could glean information about the interior of the Earth, like location of minerals, subterranean water, etc. by how the neutrino “signal” is altered.
Neutrinos for communication isn’t really needed as long as you have satellites… But in a war between advanced countries with satellite killing rockets, neutrino detectors could give a way of maintaining communication by beaming signals through the earth.
If you could make positrons cheaply, you could make powerful, compact bombs.
This is totally off topic but I don’t know how else to contact you. Would you please look over this article:
Click to access returns-on-education.pdf
The authors claim to demonstrate that the black-white IQ gap narrows substantially once blacks and whites enter college, with the gap being cut in half by graduation, suggesting that the gap reflects some environmental deficit that blacks start to overcome once they receive proper educational training in college. At first I thought that they made the error of assuming that black IQ was actually being boosted during college rather than merely selected for. In other words, if the average IQ of blacks entering college is 90, and the average IQ of whites entering college is 105, and if graduating from college requires an IQ of 105 (if there’s an intelligence threshold of some sort), then clearly the difference between blacks who graduate from college and blacks who don’t will be greater than the difference between whites who graduate from college and whites who don’t, simply because a greater proportion of blacks are being weeded out. However, the authors seem to acknowledge this:
“Similarly, if one were to consider only racial differences in the impact of a college education, a possible explanation might be that black college students benefit more because those who graduate college are a select subset of the blacks who enter college, whereas whites who graduate college are a less select group. It is certainly true that there is greater attrition among black college students than among white college students in general, as well as among NLSY participants (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994). However, this fact only makes the failure to profit from high school by the highly select group of black future college graduates all the more remarkable, and raises the possibility that the increases they showed in college resulted from the removal of whatever may have been handicapping them during high school.”
I don’t have the background to know if the authors pulled any tricks, as I suspect they did, so I would greatly appreciate it if you would read the article over and tell me what you think. Thanks
I confess that I cannot imagine, given our current technologies, what neutrinos might be good for. As other commenters have pointed out their reactions with matter are very weak. Neutrino experiments typically run for a time period on the order of a year, involve detector masses in the kilo tons, and yield confirmed neutrino detections on the order of 100 or so per experiment.
Cosmic Gall
by John Updike
You could ruin other people’s atomic bombs from anywhere on earth. But that wouldn’t make money.
With neutrinos? How?
It has been suggested that sending a neutrino beam with an energy of 1000 TeV through the Earth to wherever the nuclear weapon was located would produce neutrons in a ‘hadron shower’ and would cause fission reactions in the plutonium or uranium in the bomb. These reactions would either melt or vaporize the bomb.
Now that is a worthwhile application.
Yay-ess!
It sounds good in theory. But it would take an enormous flux, and a flux high enough to get useful absorption in the volume of a warhead would have significant absorption passing through the earth, which has a lot of uranium, a tiny bit of plutonium, and a lot of similar nuclei in it.
Utter nonsense. That would only make sense in a world where the fissile cores of nuclear bombs were kept at a critical configuration, which has to be a place where natural neutron flux was nonexistent, and where the fissile material for that bomb didn’t spontaneously decay at all. All of these aren’t true, obviously.
Now, a more interesting idea is showering a warhead that is nearing its target with neutrons in order to trigger the chain reaction – which can only take place during/after super high speed compression of the fissile core – early. The best way to do this is probably to set off a nuclear bomb near the warhead’s target, as those tend to bombard their surroundings with plenty of neutrons for a fairly lengthy stretch of time. You want as many neutrons as you can get to have the best chance of having one wandering within your opponent’s collapsing core in the very, very brief window you have. The tyranny of the inverse square law means that this would only work to protect targets that require very close, very high yield detonations.
While that might be a viable way to protect superhardened assets, it could be politically difficult to implement. Perhaps the way to do it is to make the enemy supply the nukes – I suspect that’s part of what made the ‘dense pack’ silo configuration attractive. That’s pure speculation on my part, though.
See also: http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.3991
It tends to come up on arxiv vs snarxiv often.
@ursiform
I think at least this paper suggests interfering anti- neutrino and neutrino beams which would not suffer from the problems you mentioned.
A moderately high energy antineutrino-neutrino inference beam would be, as far as I know, the ultimate weapon in space warfare, considering its low spread hence high range and complete inability of enemy combatants to stop it.
Can you provide information on how to convert a burst of neutrinos into a focused beam?
The paper discusses this problem and various other issues with producing a neutrino beam. See paragraph 4. engineering. There is some work being done apparently but there are various problems: energy efficiency, lack of squeezing/mirrors compared to lasers. Suffice to say it’s an open engineering challenge.
Sometimes when I’m bored I use tweezers to carefully pull a single proton off mercury atoms, thus turning them into gold.
Wouldn’t it be better to use chopsticks to catch one of the lose protons on a water molecule flying by and force it onto a lead atom? You wouldn’t have to deal with mercury vapor that way.
Greg, this is random, but is there any evolutionary tendency for mitochondria-related nuclear genes to relocate themselves to the female sex chromosome, across Eukaryotes?
Can these particles travel back in time as well?
All particles can travel back in time. One directional time as we know it is meaningless when talking about single particles. Many become their own anti-particles (they look different from our point of view) when going the other way in time.
Neutrinos might be one of a few that are also their own anti-particles no matter how you look at them.
Neutrinos are not their own antiparticles.
You should tell all the scientists studying neutrinoless double-beta decay that you already solved this one.
Efficient detection of neutrinos would light up the location of every operating nuclear reactor in the world, including those in nuclear submarines. ~100 MWatt neutrino beacons all of them.
Those are low-energy neutrinos. The cross-section goes up roughly linearly with neutrino energy in the few-Gev range.
I’ve blogged on this. No. Detector cross section is too low.