The Neutrino Spectrum
We are constantly bombarded by questions and comments regarding superluminic speed and Neutrinos. With respect to Neutrinos, our opinions are in other papers in our home page. Here we’ll talk about the same subject, but we will put together both issues: the Neutrino spectrum and light speed. We refer again to the quote from a physicist at University of Michigan Physics Deparment. The idea inside the following expression is common “By the way, photons travel at the speed of light because their mass is identically zero. That is to say, if the “particle” doesn’t have zero mass, it is impossible for it to travel at light speed. But other ideas are accepted: The most common mass accepted for the Neutrino is 20 eV (Really people accept 0, 10^-7, 10^-4, 20, 30, 1000, 2000, 17000 eV, though the last one seems “to be dead”). A mass of 20 eV is accepted, and simultaneously that this Neutrino is traveling at light speed. The contradiction is evident throughout SR.
When the Physicists are confronted with this contradiction, they prefer to accept a Neutrino of zero rest mass. Now they confront another evident contradiction: A Neutrino with zero rest mass cannot “oscillate”, because there is nothing to change. But the SR believers will not give up!
Another technical opinion is the following: “As far as we can tell, neutrinos have zero rest mass. But there is no reason they should. So, by looking at the end point energy of the electron from muon decay, you can set an upper limit on the mass of the neutrino”. Of course, this does not support any detailed analysis or “cross-examination.” If we are looking for “an upper limit on mass”, it is obvious that the value should be bigger than zero, event though the statements “we can tell the neutrinos have zero rest mass” and there “is no reason they should,” is another contradiction. The important thing is that this is the classical argument inside the SR conception. Anything is legitimate as long as it sustains SR’s fallacies. Einstein assumed an idea that he later rejected himself.
In the same comment there is the following:
“In this (and in fact in all decays, and all processes) four-momentum is conserved. When a particle decays into two particles, like pi-zero -> photon + photon, the photons (in the rest frame of the pi-zero) come out with an energy exactly equal to half the rest-mass of the pion. (By the way, photons travel at the speed of light because their mass is identically zero.) Because muon decay is a three body decay then only total four-momentum must conserved, there is thus a continuous set of four-momentum that can add up to the rest mass of the muon. Hence, we you measure the relativistic energy of the electron it has a lower bound of the rest-mass of the electron (.511 MeV) and an upper limit of the rest-mass of the muon (106 MeV). This has been verified to a high degree. In fact, high precision experiments have been based on this fact to measure the mass of the neutrino. As far as we can tell the neutrinos have zero mass. But there is no reason they should. So, by looking at the end point energy of the electron from muon decay you can set an upper limit on mass of the neutrino.”
This is a powerful argument, very powerful: not for SR but for AD.
“When a particle decays into two particles, like pi zero —-> photon + photon, the photons (in the rest frame of the pi-zero ( In AD, this is simply “phenomenon” and observer)) come out with an energy exactly equal to half the rest-mass of the pion).”
Frankly, we cannot expect any different result given the law of energy conservation. No neutrino is needed: therefore, the AD solution. In this case, the SR equations for momentum and energy are not used. Only the SR equation E = hv that is accepted by AD. There is a good example of this in the Carezani paper “The Compton Effect and Autodynamics”.
But now the REAL problem begins: “Because muon decay is a three body decay … Hence, we you measure the relativistic energy of the electron…”
We are doing much more than simply measuring “relativistic energy.” We are measuring “relativistic energy” with SR equations for KE and momentum. In this particular situation, it is necessary to introduce the Neutrino, because the SR equations yield values greater than the experimental values. In the above example, we had energy conservation. In the present case of muon decay, there is no energy and momentum conservation because the equations used (SR) give larger values than the expected experimental values!
Measuring “relativistic energy” using the AD equations for energy and momentum, the results match the experimental values, and neither the Neutrino or any penetrating radiation is not needed. (There is energy and momentum conservation.)
On the other hand, neutrino energy could never be measured “directly”, given that Neutrino mass is unknown.
What does the Neutrino-spectrum mean then? The Neutrino-spectrum is the difference between the energy calculated with the SR equations and the experimental values. We symbolically can write this as:
SR values – EXPERIMENTAL values = Neutrino spectrum
In AD, the answer is even simpler and more elegant:
AD values – EXPERIMENTAL values = Zero
No Neutrino nor any penetrating radiation is needed. As was pointed out by David de Hilster:
“The NEUTRINO is the ETHER of the 20 CENTURY!”