4 ms·
Neutrino observatories have ruled it out (for meaningfully large aggregate power levels). - "...hypothetical georeactor at the center of the Earth having power
by perihelions 5y ago
Neutrino observatories have ruled it out (for meaningfully large aggregate power levels).
- "...hypothetical georeactor at the center of the Earth having power greater than 2.4 TW at 95% C.L. is excluded"
https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.02257 https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.02257
(That physics paper counts more coauthors than neutrinos!)
- dredmorbius 5y ago> That physics paper counts more coauthors than neutrinos. And that's even before enabling Javascript. (Javascript-enabled neutrinos will be a key feature of Web 6.0.) (Oh, and thanks!) Questions: - How'd you find this? I'm suspecting something like "earth's core reactor neutrinos". - I don't even know how to read/interpret the notation used to express neutrino counts. Though if we can divide 112 co-authors (including deceased) by annual detection rates we can come up with a neutrino-seconds equivalent of authors....
- dredmorbius 5y agoFrom another source --- it looks as if the detector was picking up 2 neutrino events per month. So yes, authors > neutrinos. (That's a ... really low detection rate.)