Ice Cube Neutrinos

Strassler tells us that the Ice Cube neutrino experiment has updated its recent report of PeV neutrinos. Apparently they now see 28 events, well above the expected background!

These events are well distributed across the sky, and do not seem to correspond to known astrophysical sources. Actually, if we look at the declination axis, we see that there are more events in the southern sky (but need more data, need more data). Sounds a bit like the Planck CMB.

More Mixing II

It is clear that the Jarlskog invariant splits

into a cyclic factor and the (tb) term of the CKM matrix, which then characterises the symmetry breaking. Recall that the a, b and c parameters just give the standard Euler angles for the CKM matrix. With the recent data, b is around 24.3. Thus we write the cyclic part of J as three squared cosines, and it is clear that these Euler angles are directly related to the quark mass hierarchy. That is, we should write a squared cosine in the form (m1 - m2)(m3 - m4) with one up quark and one down quark factor, normalising the masses to some scale.

Since we know the quark masses (up to the scale) from Koide phenomenology, we can now easily derive the Euler angles from the Koide parameters. This greatly reduces the theoretical degrees of freedom that people usually play with.

More Mixing

So I got around to fixing the old mixing paper yet again. Probably there are still some mistakes, but it is better. For instance, I just saw that the new data is somewhat different. Now the parameters look like (-0.2314, 24.1, 0.00347). But that's OK, because the Jarlskog invariant still fits the constraints at J = 3.15 x 10^(-5), noting that the present experimental value is rather low (around 3.0).

Veneziano

When I wrote my thesis I did not know about this lovely paper on the five point function using categorical polytopes. I guess google was not so good in those days? Strangely, the arxiv page only has one version, which seems to conflict with reality. The arxiv is a very strange place. Last year I downloaded the paper from the arxiv, but it disappeared from my email inbox. Anyway, enjoy.

What about Planck's Hubble

What can one do with the new Planck results? The two biggest issues, putting aside the low multipole picture, are the A_L measurement and the Hubble constant anomaly. The former is already being attributed to strange neutrino properties. For the latter, we first need to reduce the expected Hubble constant value using some alternative FRW cosmology. To correct at low z, we should use smaller powers of (1 + z) in the time dependent function, as in the example

which has no ordinary LCDM matter in it - but do we want that anyway? If we allow strange properties for mass, the curvature term can still be embedded in a k = 0 framework with the density for matter going like 1/a^2.

Yet Still

They stopped having their latest conversation about me behind my back. One can always tell when they do it, from the internet traffic. The Pittsburg person is back, though. I think I know who that is, because he occasionally turns up in exotic places, when there happens to be a conference on a certain topic there. Still a small world.

The Mirror

How could so many dedicated theorists miss something so obvious?

Human pig headedness in this case comes down to the quantum vacuum. I was too heavily influenced by Schwinger, amongst other things. Most physicists are too heavily influenced by Dirac. The key is to understand how both Schwinger and Dirac can be right at the same time; how the vacuum can be both nothingness and a seething sea, a zero energy state and the infinite potential. It should have been obvious a long time ago - because duality (the M theory kind) tells us to look at transformations between scales. The mirror, shining in the vacuum. The mirror of time irreversibility, where we can only see one way.

Anyway, now there is the mirror neutrino, as observed in the CMB. And only three relativistic neutrino species in the early universe, as observed by Planck. And no cold dark matter, as observed by the direct detection experiments, and indicated by MOND phenomenology (not theory). And 2 keV oscillations, as observed by DAMA. And a positron excess, as observed by Pamela and Fermi.