The $330m Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) has released its first results following the completion of the huge underground facility in August.

JUNO is located in Kaiping City, Guangdong Province, in the south of the country around 150 km west of Hong Kong.

Construction of the facility began in 2015 and was set to be complete some five years later. Yet the project suffered from serious flooding, which delayed construction.

JUNO, which is expected to run for more than 30 years, aims to study the relationship between the three types of neutrino: electron, muon and tau. Although JUNO will be able to detect neutrinos produced by supernovae as well as those from Earth, the observatory will mainly measure the energy spectrum of electron antineutrinos released by the Yangjiang and Taishan nuclear power plants, which both lie 52.5 km away.

To do this, the facility has a 80 m high and 50 m diameter experimental hall located 700 m underground. Its main feature is a 35 m radius spherical neutrino detector, containing 20,000 tonnes of liquid scintillator. When an electron antineutrino occasionally bumps into a proton in the liquid, it triggers a reaction that results in two flashes of light that are detected by the 43,000 photomultiplier tubes that observe the scintillator.

On 18 November, a paper was submitted to the arXiv preprint server concluding that the detector’s key performance indicators fully meet or surpass design expectations.

New measurement 

Neutrinos oscillate from one flavour to another as they travel near the speed of light, rarely interacting with matter. This oscillation is a result of each flavour being a combination of three neutrino mass states.

Yet scientists do not know the absolute masses of the three neutrinos but can measure neutrino oscillation parameters, known as θ₁₂, θ₂₃ and θ₁₃, as well as the square of the mass differences (Δm²) between two different types of neutrinos.

A second JUNO paper submitted on 18 November used data collected between 26 August and 2 November to measure the solar neutrino oscillation parameter θ₁₂ and Δm²₂₁ with a factor of 1.6 better precision than previous experiments.

Those earlier results, which used solar neutrinos instead of reactor antineutrinos, showed a 1.5 “sigma” discrepancy with the Standard Model of particle physics. The new JUNO measurements confirmed this difference, dubbed the solar neutrino tension, but further data will be needed to prove or disprove the finding.

“Achieving such precision within only two months of operation shows that JUNO is performing exactly as designed,” says Yifang Wang from the Institute of High Energy Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who is JUNO project manager and spokesperson. “With this level of accuracy, JUNO will soon determine the neutrino mass ordering, test the three-flavour oscillation framework, and search for new physics beyond it.”

JUNO, which is an international collaboration of more than 700 scientists from 75 institutions across 17 countries including China, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, Thailand, and the US, is the second neutrino experiment in China, after the Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Experiment. It successfully measured a key neutrino oscillation parameter called θ₁₃ in 2012 before being closed down in 2020.

JUNO is also one of three next-generation neutrino experiments, the other two being the Hyper-Kamiokande in Japan and the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment in the US. Both are expected to become operational later this decade.

The post Scientists in China celebrate the completion of the underground JUNO neutrino observatory appeared first on Physics World.

New experiments at CERN by an international team have ruled out a potential source of intergalactic magnetic fields. The existence of such fields is invoked to explain why we do not observe secondary gamma rays originating from blazars.

Led by Charles Arrowsmith at the UK’s University of Oxford, the team suggests the absence of gamma rays could be the result of an unexplained phenomenon that took place in the early universe.

A blazar is an extraordinarily bright object with a supermassive black hole at its core. Some of the matter falling into the black hole is accelerated outwards in a pair of opposing jets, creating intense beams of radiation. If a blazar jet points towards Earth, we observe a bright source of light including high-energy teraelectronvolt gamma rays.

During their journey across intergalactic space, these gamma-ray photons will occasionally collide with the background starlight that permeates the universe. These collisions can create cascades of electrons and positrons that can then scatter off photons to create gamma rays in the gigaelectronvolt energy range. These gamma-rays should travel in the direction of the original jet, but this secondary radiation has never been detected.

Deflecting field

Magnetic fields could be the reason for this dearth, as Arrowsmith explains: “The electrons and positrons in the pair cascade would be deflected by an intergalactic magnetic field, so if this is strong enough, we could expect these pairs to be steered away from the line of sight to the blazar, along with the reprocessed gigaelectronvolt gamma rays.” It is not clear, however, that such fields exist – and if they do, what could have created them.

Another explanation for the missing gamma rays involves the extremely sparse plasma that permeates intergalactic space. The beam of electron–positron pairs could interact with this plasma, generating magnetic fields that separate the pairs. Over millions of years of travel, this process could lead to beam–plasma instabilities that reduce the beam’s ability to create gigaelectronvolt gamma rays that are focused on Earth.

Oxford’s Gianluca Gregori  explains, “We created an experimental platform at the HiRadMat facility at CERN to create electron–positron pairs and transport them through a metre-long ambient argon plasma, mimicking the interaction of pair cascades from blazars with the intergalactic medium”. Once the pairs had passed through the plasma, the team measured the degree to which they had been separated.

Tightly focused

Called Fireball, the experiment found that the beams remained far more tightly focused than expected. “When these laboratory results are scaled up to the astrophysical system, they confirm that beam–plasma instabilities are not strong enough to explain the absence of the gigaelectronvolt gamma rays from blazars,” Arrowsmith explains. Unless the pair beam is perfectly collimated, or composed of pairs with exactly equal energies, instabilities were actively suppressed in the plasma.

While the experiment suggests that an intergalactic magnetic field remains the best explanation for the lack of gamma rays, the mystery is far from solved. Gregori explains, “The early universe is believed to be extremely uniform – but magnetic fields require electric currents, which in turn need gradients and inhomogeneities in the primordial plasma.” As a result, confirming the existence of such a field could point to new physics beyond the Standard Model, which may have dominated in the early universe.

More information could come with opening of the Cherenkov Telescope Array Observatory. This will comprise ground-based gamma-ray detectors planned across facilities in Spain and Chile, which will vastly improve on the resolutions of current-generation detectors.

The research is described in PNAS.

The post Accelerator experiment sheds light on missing blazar radiation appeared first on Physics World.

What skills do you use every day in your job?

One thing I can say for sure that I got from working in academia is the ability to quickly read, summarize and internalize information from a bunch of sources. Journalism requires a lot of that. Being able to skim through papers – reading the abstract, reading the conclusion, picking the right bits from the middle and so on – that is a life skill.

In terms of other skills, I’m always considering who’s consuming what I’m doing rather than just thinking about how I’d like to say something. You have to think about how it’s going to be received – what’s the person on the street going to hear? Is this clear enough? If I were hearing this for the first time, would I understand it? Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes – be it the listener, reader or viewer – is a skill I employ every day.

What do you like best and least about your job?

The best thing is the variety. I ended up in this business and not in scientific research because of a desire for a greater breadth of experience. And boy, does this job have it. I get to talk to people around the world about what they’re up to, what they see, what it’s like, and how to understand it. And I think that makes me a much more informed person than I would be had I chosen to remain a scientist.

When I did research – and even when I was a science journalist – I thought “I don’t need to think about what’s going on in that part of the world so much because that’s not my area of expertise.” Now I have to, because I’m in this chair every day. I need to know about lots of stuff, and I like that feeling of being more informed.

I suppose what I like the least about my job is the relentlessness of it. It is a newsy time. It’s the flip side of being well informed, you’re forced to confront lots of bad things – the horrors that are going on in the world, the fact that in a lot of places the bad guys are winning.

What do you know today that you wish you knew when you were starting out in your career?

When I started in science journalism, I wasn’t a journalist – I was a scientist pretending to be one. So I was always trying to show off what I already knew as a sort of badge of legitimacy. I would call some professor on a topic that I wasn’t an expert in yet just to have a chat to get up to speed, and I would spend a bunch of time showing off, rabbiting on about what papers I’d read and what I knew, just to feel like I belonged in the room or on that call. And it’s a waste of time. You have to swallow your ego and embrace the idea that you may sound like you don’t know stuff even if you do. You might sound dumber, but that’s okay – you’ll learn more and faster, and you’ll probably annoy people less.

In journalism in particular, you don’t want to preload the question with all of the things that you already know because then the person you’re speaking to can fill in those blanks – and they’re probably going to talk about things you didn’t know you didn’t know, and take your conversation in a different direction.

It’s one of the interesting things about science in general. If you go into a situation with experts, and are open and comfortable about not knowing it all, you’re showing that you understand that nobody can know everything and that science is a learning process.

The post Ask me anything: Jason Palmer – ‘Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes is a skill I employ every day’ appeared first on Physics World.

Retour en 2007, Apple sort sa sixième version de Mac OS X, Leopard.
Très rapidement les critiques fusent, trop de nouveautés assorties de trop de bugs récurrents.
Pour faire face au mécontentement général, Apple décide de faire une pause dans les nouvelles fonctions et sort deux ans plus tard Snow Leopard. Cette version n'apporte que peu de nouveautés. En revanche l'accent a été mis sur la correction des bugs et l'amélioration des performances.

Aux dernières nouvelles la société s'apprêterait à faire de même avec iOS 27. La mise à jour n'apportera que peu de nouveautés visibles. En échange, tout sera retravaillé afin d'optimiser les performances et la stabilité. Le but est de créer un socle stable pour le futur.
Nous ne vous cachons pas que c'est une excellente nouvelle qui demande à être confirmée. C'est d'autant plus vrai qu'il y a aujourd'hui un facteur capital qui s'ajoute, la sécurité.

En 2009, il y avait peu de pirates réellement intéressés à réaliser des piratages de masse sur les Mac. Aujourd'hui, toutes les mises à jour iOS s'accompagnent de mises à jour de sécurité multiples car les failles peuvent rapporter des fortunes. Faire une pause dans les nouveautés et revoir le code en profondeur devrait donc aussi permettre de rendre iOS plus robuste face aux attaques incessantes.

Physicists working on the Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus (ALPHA) experiment at CERN have trapped and accumulated 15,000 antihydrogen atoms in less than 7 h. This accumulation rate is more than 20 times the previous record. Large ensembles of antihydrogen could be used to search for tiny, unexpected differences between matter and antimatter – which if discovered could point to physics beyond the Standard Model.

According to the Standard Model every particle has an antimatter counterpart – or antiparticle. It also says that roughly equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created in the Big Bang. But, today there is much more matter than antimatter in the visible universe, and the reason for this “baryon asymmetry” is one of the most important mysteries of physics.

The Standard Model predicts the properties of antiparticles. An antiproton, for example, has the same mass as a proton and the opposite charge. The Standard Model also predicts how antiparticles interact with matter and antimatter. If physicists could find discrepancies between the measured and predicted properties of antimatter, it could help explain the baryon asymmetry and point to other new physics beyond the Standard Model.

Powerful probe

Just as a hydrogen atom comprises a proton bound to an electron, an antihydrogen antiatom comprises an antiproton bound to an antielectron (positron). Antihydrogen offers physicists several powerful ways to probe antimatter at a fundamental level. Trapped antiatoms can be released in freefall to determine if they respond to gravity in the same way as atoms. Spectroscopy can be used to make precise measurements of how the electromagnetic force binds the antiproton and positron in antihydrogen with the aim of finding differences compared to hydrogen.

So far, antihydrogen’s gravitational and electromagnetic properties appear to be identical to hydrogen. However, these experiments were done using small numbers of antiatoms, and having access to much larger ensembles would improve the precision of such measurements and could reveal tiny discrepancies. However, creating and storing antihydrogen is very difficult.

Today, antihydrogen can only be made in significant quantities at CERN in Switzerland. There, a beam of protons is fired at a solid target, creating antiprotons that are then cooled and stored using electromagnetic fields. Meanwhile, positrons are gathered from the decay of radioactive nuclei and cooled and stored using electromagnetic fields. These antiprotons and positrons are then combined in a special electromagnetic trap to create antihydrogen.

This process works best when the antiprotons and positrons have very low kinetic energies (temperatures) when combined. If the energy is too high, many antiatoms will be escape the trap. So, it is crucial that the positrons and antiprotons to be as cold as possible.

Sympathetic cooling

Recently, ALPHA physicists have used a technique called sympathetic cooling on positrons, and in a new paper they describe their success.  Sympathetic cooling has been used for several decades to cool atoms and ions. It originally involved mixing a hard-to-cool atomic species with atoms that are relatively easy to cool using lasers. Energy is transferred between the two species via the electromagnetic interaction, which chills the hard-to-cool atoms.

The ALPHA team used beryllium ions to sympathetically cool positrons to 10 K, which is five degrees colder than previously achieved using other techniques. These cold positrons boosted the efficiency of the creation and trapping of antihydrogen, allowing the team to accumulate 15,000 antihydrogen atoms in less than 7 h. This is more than a 20-fold improvement over their previous record of accumulating 2000 antiatoms in 24 h.

Science fiction

“These numbers would have been considered science fiction 10 years ago,” says ALPHA spokesperson Jeffrey Hangst, who is a Denmark’s Aarhus University.

Team member Maria Gonçalves, a PhD student at the UK’s Swansea University, says, “This result was the culmination of many years of hard work. The first successful attempt instantly improved the previous method by a factor of two, giving us 36 antihydrogen atoms”.

The effort was led by Niels Madsen of the UK’s Swansea University. He enthuses, “It’s more than a decade since I first realized that this was the way forward, so it’s incredibly gratifying to see the spectacular outcome that will lead to many new exciting measurements on antihydrogen”.

The cooling technique is described in Nature Communications.

The post Sympathetic cooling gives antihydrogen experiment a boost appeared first on Physics World.

The Sun frequently ejects high-energy bursts of plasma that then travel through interplanetary space. These so-called coronal mass ejections (CMEs) are accompanied by strong magnetic fields, which, when they interact with the Earth’s atmosphere, can trigger solar storms that can severely damage satellite systems and power grids.

In the early days of the solar system, the Sun was far more active than it is today and ejected much bigger CMEs. These might have been energetic enough to affect our planet’s atmosphere and therefore influence how life emerged and evolved on Earth, according to some researchers.

Since it is impossible to study the early Sun, astronomers use proxies – that is, stars that resemble it. These “exo-suns” are young G-, K- and M-type stars and are far more active than our Sun is today. They frequently produce CMEs with energies far larger than the most energetic solar flares recorded in recent times, which might not only affect their planets’ atmospheres, but may also affect the chemistry on these planets.

Until now, direct observational evidence for eruptive CME-like phenomena on young solar analogues has been limited. This is because clear signatures of stellar eruptions are often masked by the brightness of their host stars and flares on these. Measurements of Doppler shifts in optical lines have allowed astronomers to detect a few possible stellar eruptions associated with giant superflares on a young solar analogue, but these detections have been limited to single-wavelength data at “low temperatures” of around 10⁴ K. Studies at higher temperatures have been few and far between. And although scientists have tried out promising techniques, such as X-ray and UV dimming, to advance their understanding of these “cool” stars, few simultaneous multi-wavelength observations have been made.

A large Carrington-class flare from EK Draconis

On 29 March 2024, astronomers at Kyoto University in Japan detected a large Carrington-class flare – or superflare – in the far-ultraviolet from EK Draconis, a G-type star located approximately 112 light-years away from the Sun. Thanks to simultaneous observations in the ultraviolet and optical ranges of the electromagnetic spectrum, they say they have now been able to obtain the first direct evidence for a multi-temperature CME from this young solar analogue (which is around 50 to 125 million years old and has a radius similar to the Sun).

The researchers’ campaign spanned four consecutive nights from 29 March to 1 April 2024. They made their ultraviolet observations with the Hubble Space Telescope and the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) and performed optical monitoring using three ground-based telescopes in Japan, Korea and the US.

They found that the far-ultraviolet and optical lines were Doppler shifted during and just before the superflare, with the ultraviolet observations showing blueshifted emission indicative of hot plasma. About 10 minutes later, the optical telescopes observed blueshifted absorption in the hydrogen Hα line, which indicates cooler gases. According to the team’s calculations, the hot plasma had a temperature of 100 000 K and was ejected at speeds of 300–550 km/s, while the “cooler” gas (with a temperature of 10 000 K) was ejected at 70 km/s.

“These findings imply that it is the hot plasma rather than the cool plasma that carries kinetic energy into planetary space,” explains study leader Kosuke Namekata. “The existence of this plasma suggests that such CMEs from our Sun in the past, if frequent and strong, could have driven shocks and energetic particles capable of eroding or chemically altering the atmosphere of the early Earth and the other planets in our solar system.”

“The discovery,” he tells Physics World, “provides the first observational link between solar and stellar eruptions, bridging stellar astrophysics, solar physics and planetary science.”

Looking forward, the researchers, who report their work in Nature Astronomy, now plan to conduct similar, multiwavelength campaigns on other young solar analogues to determine how frequently such eruptions occur and how they vary from star to star.

“In the near future, next-generation ultraviolet space telescopes such as JAXA’s LAPYUTA and NASA’s ESCAPADE, coordinated with ground-based facilities, will allow us to trace these events more systematically and understand their cumulative impact on planetary atmospheres,” says Namekata.

The post Plasma bursts from young stars could shed light on the early life of the Sun appeared first on Physics World.

Je l'ai vu passer partout, voilà les explications techniques (en anglais).

En bref, non, pas pour un usage en chatbot, car si le M5 va 25% plus vite que le M4, l'accélération énorme (jusqu'à 4 fois plus rapide) promise n'est que pour l'ingestion des Tokens du Prompt (l'entrée donc), pas pour le traitement subséquent.

Avec mon prompt maintenant célèbre "Que faire un week-end de vacances à Limoges?" il n'y aura aucune accélération visible, hors les meilleures perfs du M5 face au M4, grâce à sa meilleure bande-passante mémoire. Mais pas nécessairement un meilleur week-end !

Donc en général, non, MLX sous macOS 26.2 n'accélèrera pas grand chose...

En ce moment, profitez du Black Friday : soutenez MacBidouille et partagez vos trouvailles

Astronomers have long puzzled over the cause of a mysterious “glow” of very high energy gamma radiation emanating from the centre of our galaxy. One possibility is that dark matter – the unknown substance thought to make up more than 25% of the universe’s mass – might be involved. Now, a team led by researchers at Germany’s Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam (AIP) says that a flattened rather than spherical distribution of dark matter could account for the glow’s properties, bringing us a step closer to solving the mystery.

Dark matter is believed to be responsible for holding galaxies together. However, since it does not interact with light or other electromagnetic radiation, it can only be detected through its gravitational effects. Hence, while astrophysical and cosmological evidence has confirmed its presence, its true nature remains one of the greatest mysteries in modern physics.

“It’s extremely consequential and we’re desperately thinking all the time of ideas as to how we could detect it,” says Joseph Silk, an astronomer at Johns Hopkins University in the US and the Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris and Sorbonne University in France who co-led this research together with the AIP’s Moorits Mihkel Muru. “Gamma rays, and specifically the excess light we’re observing at the centre of our galaxy, could be our first clue.”

Models might be too simple

The problem, Muru explains, is that the way scientists have usually modelled dark matter to account for the excess gamma-ray radiation in astronomical observations was highly simplified. “This, of course, made the calculations easier, but simplifications always fuzzy the details,” he says. “We showed that in this case, the details are important: we can’t model dark matter as a perfectly symmetrical cloud and instead have to take into account the asymmetry of the cloud.”

Muru adds that the team’s findings, which are detailed in Phys. Rev. Lett., provide a boost to the “dark matter annihilation” explanation of the excess radiation. According to the standard model of cosmology, all galaxies – including our own Milky Way – are nested inside huge haloes of dark matter. The density of this dark matter is highest at the centre, and while it primarily interacts through gravity, some models suggest that it could be made of massive, neutral elementary particles that are their own antimatter counterparts. In these dense regions, therefore, such dark matter species could be mutually annihilating, producing substantial amounts of radiation.

Pierre Salati, an emeritus professor at the Université Savoie Mont Blanc, France, who was not involved in this work, says that in these models, annihilation plays a crucial role in generating a dark matter component with an abundance that agrees with cosmological observations. “Big Bang nucleosynthesis sets stringent bounds on these models as a result of the overall concordance between the predicted elemental abundances and measurements, although most models do survive,” Salati says. “One of the most exciting aspects of such explanations is that dark matter species might be detected through the rare antimatter particles – antiprotons, positrons and anti-deuterons – that they produce as they currently annihilate inside galactic halos.”

Silvia Manconi of the Laboratoire de Physique Théorique et Hautes Energies (LPTHE), France, who was also not involved in the study, describes it as “interesting and stimulating”. However, she cautions that – as is often the case in science – reality is probably more complex than even advanced simulations can capture. “This is not the first time that galaxy simulations have been used to study the implications of the excess and found non-spherical shapes,” she says, though she adds that the simulations in the new work offer “significant improvements” in terms of their spatial resolution.

Manconi also notes that the study does not demonstrate how the proposed distribution of dark matter would appear in data from the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope’s Large Area Telescope (LAT), or how it would differ quantitatively from observations of a distribution of old stars. Forthcoming observations with radio telescopes such as MeerKat and FAST, she adds, may soon identify pulsars in this region of the galaxy, shedding further light on other possible contributions to the excess of gamma rays.

New telescopes could help settle the question

Muru acknowledges that better modelling and observations are still needed to rule out other possible hypotheses. “Studying dark matter is very difficult, because it doesn’t emit or block light, and despite decades of searching, no experiment has yet detected dark matter particles directly,” he tells Physics World. “A confirmation that this observed excess radiation is caused by dark matter annihilation through gamma rays would be a big leap forward.”

New gamma-ray telescopes with higher resolution, such as the Cherenkov Telescope Array, could help settle this question, he says. If these telescopes, which are currently under construction, fail to find star-like sources for the glow and only detect diffuse radiation, that would strengthen the alternative dark matter annihilation explanation.

Muru adds that a “smoking gun” for dark matter would be a signal that matches current theoretical predictions precisely. In the meantime, he and his colleagues plan to work on predicting where dark matter should be found in several of the dwarf galaxies that circle the Milky Way.

“It’s possible we will see the new data and confirm one theory over the other,” Silk says. “Or maybe we’ll find nothing, in which case it’ll be an even greater mystery to resolve.”

The post Flattened halo of dark matter could explain high-energy ‘glow’ at Milky Way’s heart appeared first on Physics World.

It is book week here at Physics World and over the course of three days we are presenting conversations with the authors of three fascinating and fun books about physics. Today, my guest is the physicist Daniel Whiteson, who along with the artist Andy Warner has created the delightful book Do Aliens Speak Physics?.

Is physics universal, or is it shaped by human perspective? This will be a very important question if and when we are visited by an advanced alien civilization. Would we recognize our visitors’ alien science – or indeed, could a technologically-advanced civilization have no science at all? And would we even be able to communicate about science with our alien guests?

Whiteson, who is a particle physicist at the University of California Irvine, tackles these profound questions and much more in this episode of the Physics World Weekly podcast.

The post Talking physics with an alien civilization: what could we learn? appeared first on Physics World.