Neutrinos and OPERA

[LeoXR]

I have read about the DE flat earth theory and it is quite interesting to me. I believe it to be among the best flat earth concepts. I will ask a couple questions relating to neutrinos.

First, where do the flux of neutrinos that have been observed come from? Here is an article explaining a neutrino measurement experiment that have revealed a flux of 66 billion solar neutrinos per second: www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/08/underground-experiment-confirms-what-powers-sun

Also, from wikipedia: In the vicinity of the Earth, about 65 billion (6.5×1010) solar neutrinos per second pass through every square centimeter perpendicular to the direction of the Sun.

- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

The explanation for this in the standard model is that the majority of neutrino flux that we observe come from nuclear reactions in the sun. However, nuclear fusion doesn't exist in the DE theory from what I learned. 
So, I'll repeat, where do the flux of neutrinos that have been observed come from? Keep in mind that there are billions per square cm for every second, and it seems to be correlated with being perpendicular to the direction of the sun.

And second, how does the DE theory explain the results of the OPERA neutrino oscillation experiment? 

What they did as a collaboration between CERN and LNGS is that there was fired pulses of neutrino beam through the Earth, and it reached the Gran Sasso Lab from CERN. It traveled from Switzerland to Germany, by going into the Earth. The other detector got five Tau Neutrinos, and so it was successful: home.cern/about/updates/2015/06/opera-detects-its-fifth-tau-neutrino 
Here is a Wikipedia page on the experiment: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPERA_experiment
The path of the beam was angled underground and it reached the surface of Earth elsewhere, it makes perfect sense on a RE, as depicted here:



How is this explained in the DE theory?

I am well aware that there are two sides to the Earth in this model, but the path of the neutrinos would have stayed within the northern hemiplane as commonly depicted in the presumed layout of the Earth (between Switzerland and Italy), so even in the DE conception of Earth, the neutrinos couldn't travel in a straight line to the other area. 

I would post this in the debate section, but rather than interpreting it as a definite refutation to DE, I would rather treat it as a question and see your answer. After all, Dual Earth is probably the most well-equipped flat earth model to potentially explain the OPERA experiment results. 

[JRowe]

Feb 28, 2018 1:51:39 GMT LeoXR said:

First, where do the flux of neutrinos that have been observed come from? Here is an article explaining a neutrino measurement experiment that have revealed a flux of 66 billion solar neutrinos per second: www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/08/underground-experiment-confirms-what-powers-sun

Also, from wikipedia: In the vicinity of the Earth, about 65 billion (6.5×1010) solar neutrinos per second pass through every square centimeter perpendicular to the direction of the Sun.

- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

The explanation for this in the standard model is that the majority of neutrino flux that we observe come from nuclear reactions in the sun. However, nuclear fusion doesn't exist in the DE theory from what I learned. 
So, I'll repeat, where do the flux of neutrinos that have been observed come from? Keep in mind that there are billions per square cm for every second, and it seems to be correlated with being perpendicular to the direction of the sun.

Thank you for the interesting questions.
There are three key points to note here. The first is confirmation bias; it's the common issue with using statements of mainstream science as proofs of mainstream science. They aren't meant to serve as proofs, and in many respects it shows. Such as in that link, you can see many mentions of trying to clear up noise, radioactive contaminants... Specifically altering what it was they read in order to get closer to what it is their model predicted. This isn't a major flaw, it's just something worth acknowledging.
The second is that it wouldn't be correlated to the Sun. The RE model states that neutrinos are basically unaffected by the mass of the Earth, able to pass right through without any alteration. There is some confirmation bias with respect to direction, but little else. It could be midnight and you'd detect just as many supposed solar neutrinos. The article makes no mention of any such correlation.
Third is that there are just three flavors of neutrino, and they have causes other than that of the Sun. For example, simply the exposure of the atmosphere to radiation will create some. The electron neutrinos that article studies are known to be a result of just beta decay.

With that all together, it's just a matter of noting the smaller scale of the DE solar system with respect to the RE model. The amount of radiation the edges of the atmosphere is exposed to, with their proximity to the stars, is far greater and as such the production of neutrinos would have far more of an impact on the total number of neutrinos observed than the RE model predicts. The same neutrinos, just a different source.

Feb 28, 2018 1:51:39 GMT LeoXR said:

And second, how does the DE theory explain the results of the OPERA neutrino oscillation experiment? 

What they did as a collaboration between CERN and LNGS is that there was fired pulses of neutrino beam through the Earth, and it reached the Gran Sasso Lab from CERN. It traveled from Switzerland to Germany, by going into the Earth. The other detector got five Tau Neutrinos, and so it was successful: home.cern/about/updates/2015/06/opera-detects-its-fifth-tau-neutrino 
Here is a Wikipedia page on the experiment: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPERA_experiment
The path of the beam was angled underground and it reached the surface of Earth elsewhere, it makes perfect sense on a RE, as depicted here:



How is this explained in the DE theory?

I am well aware that there are two sides to the Earth in this model, but the path of the neutrinos would have stayed within the northern hemiplane as commonly depicted in the presumed layout of the Earth (between Switzerland and Italy), so even in the DE conception of Earth, the neutrinos couldn't travel in a straight line to the other area. 

The OPERA experiment is another indicator of confirmation bias. The goal was to determine of tau neutrinos were produced by muon neutrinos, not see the curve of the Earth. They would have worked with the assumption of RET, and so would have used that to avoid noise. I can find little on how they intended to sort out which detected neutrinos were from the CERN rather than the usual naturally produced neutrinos, the only way I can imagine is that they had some way of gauging the direction it came from, and blocked the surrounding area of the beam so that it was the only neutrino source that fired from that direction. That, of course, only functions with the assumption of RET. There would have been no blockage under DET (as you point out), and so the freedom for natural neutrinos to make the trip.

It's worth acknowledging, as well, that the equipment OPERA used was imperfect. Famously it detected neutrinos moving faster than the speed of light, blowing relativity out of the water; this was acknowledged to be an equipment failure only in the last few months of its operation. 

[LeoXR]

So, in summary, you are claiming that the atmosphere exposed to the radiation will create the neutrino flux that we observe in DE Theory?

And that the OPERA experiment is too inconclusive to be used against DE? I brought it up because it took the supposed curvature of the Earth into account and supposedly succeeded. On a flat earth, the path of the neutrinos would need to curve an arc back up to the surface after travelling down. While on a convex surface, it can go straight as a chord through earth and reach the surface elsewhere in a straight line.

[JRowe]

Mar 1, 2018 2:37:28 GMT LeoXR said:

So, in summary, you are claiming that the atmosphere exposed to the radiation will create the neutrino flux that we observe in DE Theory?

And that the OPERA experiment is too inconclusive to be used against DE? I brought it up because it took the supposed curvature of the Earth into account and supposedly succeeded. On a flat earth, the path of the neutrinos would need to curve an arc back up to the surface after travelling down. While on a convex surface, it can go straight as a chord through earth and reach the surface elsewhere in a straight line.

Primarily, yes.
The OPERA experiment has several flaws. Partly, yes, there was unreliable data. But another point is the fact it assumed RET, rather than try to prove it; they have no way to determine the source of the neutrinos that reached them. They only assumed it came from the beam, and I went through how it seems they tried to ensure that. They wouldn't have blocked off the far side of the Earth though; they wouldn't have thought they'd need to. The neutrinos could have come from anywhere.