mpc755 wrote:
When a neutrino 'disappears' it has simply 'evaporated' into aether.

How about the ones that appear? At a rate consistent with the disappearance
measured in other detectors, with momenta pointing back to the source, and with
timing consistent with that of the source. Remember that the different neutrino
detectors are sensitive to different types (flavors) of neutrinos, and the
different sources generate different types of neutrinos.

For instance, the LSND source cannot generate tau neutrinos,
but the MINOS source can and does. The MINOS detector cannot
cleanly distinguish electron from tau neutrinos but can determine
the sign of muons (i.e. nu_mu vs anti-nu_mu in quasi-elastic
scattering). Other detectors have difficulty identifying muon
neutrino events. Early radiochemical detectors were sensitive only
anti-nu_e. Etc.

The whole collection of experiments is MUCH better modeled as oscillations among
neutrino flavors than as "evaporating into aether".

Indeed, if "evaporating into aether" was common, then given that
NOBODY has ever observed aether, then 4-momentum conservation
would NOT be experimentally observed (because the energy and
momentum carried by the aether is unobservable). Instead, 4-momentum
conservation is solidly established in elementary particle
interactions. Historically, of course, neutrinos were postulated in
order to preserve energy-momentum conservation in certain decays, and
they were triumphantly observed with the appropriate properties.
Contrast that with your GUESSES about aether....


Tom Roberts