5 ms·
IceCube detection of a high-energy particle proves 60-year-old theory
- blakesterz 6y agoI was hoping O'Shea Jackson had gotten into physics, but apparently not. IceCube, in this case, is a Neutrino Observatory is the first detector of its kind, designed to observe the cosmos from deep within the South Pole ice. I've not heard of it before, looks very, uh, cool :-) https://icecube.wisc.edu/about-us/overview/ https://icecube.wisc.edu/about-us/overview/
- SiempreViernes 6y ago"Of it's kind" = using ice as the detector medium, there were other neutrino observatories before Pingu.
- maxnoe 6y agoIceCube hat a precursor experiment called Amanda, at the same location
- karaterobot 6y agoStill a good day.
- bacon_waffle 6y ago> I've not heard of it before, looks very, uh, cool :-) Indeed! I worked for IceCube for a bit over a year, several years ago, as a Winterover Experiment Operator - more like "on-site technician" than "frozen experimental physicist". Happy to answer questions about that experience.
- hobo_mark 6y agoHow many people apply each year? What criteria do they use to judge whether you can mentally(and physically) manage months of darkness in an extreme environment?
- bacon_waffle 6y ago> How many people apply each year? I don't know, having only been in the HR process from the employee end, but my impression is that IceCube gets more qualified applicants than there are positions. IceCube is (at least was) noticeably more proactive than other Science groups in terms of hiring; it's a bit past time to apply with them for next winter[1], but some other similar groups might be worth looking at if you're keen [2][3][4]. One thing that's perhaps not obvious: at least in the US program, the vast majority of people who work in Antarctica are not directly working for Science projects. IIRC, the winter I spent at S Pole there were 41 people at Pole with 8 of those employed to keep experiments running, that same winter McMurdo had more like 150-200 people and I don't think a single one was a "beaker". So, if you're interested in Antarctic work in general, start by looking for jobs with the support contractor, currently Leidos[5]. > What criteria do they use to judge whether you can mentally(and physically) manage months of darkness in an extreme environment? Months of darkness is pretty far down on the list of challenges for most people in this sort of work really. It's not common, but I've heard of people only being outside for the walk from the plane to the station at the start of a season, then back to the plane at the end. Inside the station it's comfortable, could be anywhere that's very dry and fairly high elevation. The most relatable analogy I've found to a winter at Pole (except dry and high elevation, obviously) is a 9- or 12-month trip on a big boat with about 40 other people - the biggest challenges are about the other people you're with, and the isolation from the people you're not with. What you're asking about is is called "PQ" (Physical Qualification, I believe) and when I did it there were three distinct parts: medical, dental, psychological. They don't do the psychological part the same way as when I last went through PQ, which is a good thing because the old psych eval was a bad joke. Basically the PQ process is about ensuring that a person isn't at risk of needing an evacuation in the middle of winter, because that would be slow, very expensive, and risky. Things like gallstones, cancer, heart conditions, wisdom teeth, alcoholism are red flags. I believe in recent years there's been more of an emphasis on team building before deploying too, not sure how that relates to the PQ itself. What employers /do/ look for varies a bit with role, as you'd expect, but in general flexibility and self-direction are helpful. Prior experience in the area is good too, but certainly not critical - I worked for the support contractor in the mid-00s in fuels, and of the dozen or so in our group I think only one or two had ever fueled a plane outside of Antarctica. IceCube generally seemed keen on technical generalists, good communication skills are also important. My co-winterover (and the first Norwegian to winter at South Pole) had a PhD in physics, I had a BS in electrical/computer engineering. Basically, IceCube wanted someone who could fix minor and/or very-urgent problems directly, and fall back to phone/email with an expert up North when appropriate. [1] https://icecube.wisc.edu/jobs/ https://icecube.wisc.edu/jobs/ [2] https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/CMB/harvard/ https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/CMB/harvard/ [3] https://pole.uchicago.edu/public/Home.html https://pole.uchicago.edu/public/Home.html [4] https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/spo/ https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/spo/ [5] https://www.leidos.com/capabilities/mission-operations/antarctic-support-contract https://www.leidos.com/capabilities/mission-operations/antar...
- bschne 6y agoMc Hammer is debating philosophy on twitter and clubhouse these days, who knows, might still happen
- hardtke 6y agoThere was a predecessor that proved the detector concept and eventually merged into IceCube: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Muon_And_Neutrino_Detector_Array https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Muon_And_Neutrino_De... AMANDA observed atmospheric but not extra-terrestrial neutrinos.
- ggambetta 6y ago"Proves a theory"? Karl Popper would like to have a word with them :)
- cassepipe 6y agoHey hum sorry to contact you here but I did not want to write to you on your acting address and I don't use Twitter. If I followed the math correctly I think there is a small mistake in the computation of diffused light at https://gabrielgambetta.com/computer-graphics-from-scratch/03-light.html#modeling-diffuse-reflection https://gabrielgambetta.com/computer-graphics-from-scratch/0... : In figure 3.5, the two triangles that are presented side by side are not the same. It follows I think that it is the cos of the Beta angle that should be used. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also let me thank you again for making it available as your method is very clear for a beginner and your explanations are good and straight to the point. I have sworn to myself I would buy the book by the time I finish implementing part 1 :)
- cassepipe 6y agoSorry not the cos of the Beta angle but rather the sin of the beta angle.
- cassepipe 6y agoOk sorry, I see how you are right and how I am wrong in thinking you were wrong. The figures I mentionned are indeed bit confusing though.
- ggambetta 6y agoHey, thanks for reaching out. As you've realized by yourself, the diagram is actually correct - but thanks for pointing out that it is confusing! The book is almost ready to go to print, but I'll see if this can still be fixed.
- DoofusOfDeath 6y agoThe headline reminds me of the expression, "Theory is underdetermined by data" [0]. Seems to me that the only way the headline could be true is if we use the older definition of "prove": to test. I imagine this is just another case of a university PR writer displaying his ignorance, to the great consternation of the researchers. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdetermination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdetermination
- 3np 6y agoHeadlines like this kind of discredit the research - because we all know that it's complete BS that it "proves the theory". It's easy to dismiss the whole publication based untruthful headlines like this. The author is quoted with "This result proves the feasibility of neutrino astronomy—and IceCube’s ability to do it", which is a completely different claim.
- TheHideout 6y agoTangentially related if you're interested: I worked on IceCube and ARA as an undergrad in college and wrote a lengthy paper on the autonomous power stations we built for the ARA neutrino detectors at the South Pole. https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1253 https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1253
- cbsks 6y agoThat looks like a fun project! I’m jealous!
- magicalhippo 6y agoThis talk[1] from 2019 at Perimeter gives a nice and accessible overview of IceCube and how it detects neutrinos. [1]: http://pirsa.org/19040075/ http://pirsa.org/19040075/
- lainga 6y ago6.3 PeV - that's crazy! Wolfram Alpha tells me that'd be about enough energy as work to depress a key on a keyboard.
- lokimedes 6y agoNow that would be spooky action at a distance.
- Sharlin 6y agoNot only that, but a neutrino of that energy! Its speed must have been ridiculously close to c, rather than "only" extremely close to c like almost all other neutrinos.
- smueller1234 6y agoAnother impressive one: Ultra high energy cosmic rays have been detected to 3e20 eV (300 EeV; detected by the Fly's Eye Collaboration). They're nuclei, however, so the rest mess is at least about 10000x higher. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_cosmic_ray https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_cosmic_ray If you're interested in popular science but haven't read about this before, consider following the link to the GZK cutoff from that page. It's super cool. I used to work for the Pierre Auger Observatory. Happy to try to answer any questions if folks are curious. :)
- caf 6y agoIsn't the rest mass of a proton at least 8 billion times higher than that of a neutrino?
- narag 6y agoA long long time ago I was sitting with my mother in the living room when the big glass ashtray on the round table became a thousand pieces that dispersed like a liquid with a sand-like sound. Someone told me that cosmic rays could do that. Scary.
- jcims 6y agoI sometimes wonder if ET might use particles instead of photons to communicate. Probably not these ones, but it just reminded me.
- djtriptych 6y agoDamn... Today was a good day.
- andromaton 6y agoProve math; verify science.
- dekhn 6y agowow, my friend went to install some servers for this at the south pole in.... must have been 2006? It's pretty crazy how they drill these deep holes in the ice, then drop baubles on a cable where the baubles actually have some amount of computing power to process the incoming signals.