neutrinos

Saturday Morning.
The pool is closed for 3 months, perhaps to extend it by 4 inches which would be weird, but is a thing I learned about far from the pool itself.
For the moment I am filling in with non-outdoor swimming activities; but the future remains unclear.  There is also the whole 5 days when the gym will be closed for observance of superstitious practices.
So the day before it closed, I swam my last 2200 yards, the next day weights, then yoga.  Today, I don't know.  It is no longer early, but I am moving slowly.

I have a team if it stays together which is impressive and covers all the areas which it needs.
A world class mathematician
A capable phd candidate CE
A phD EE
A PhD ME
There is also a chemist who may be conflicted out and a physicist who is agreeable but has other issues to contend with.
There is also a search which remains outstanding until the end of December; a short time, but an important time frame.

One of the problems with explaining aut in terms of observations is dealing with outdated language.
In the article which follows one of those, the neutrino, is discussed.
The "mass" of the neutrino is discussed in terms of electron volts, a measurement itself which is fraught with problems since it involves both pre-time and post time elements.  The whole idea of measuring with energy or mass is fraught with observation issues, whereas AuT is a more pure system which allows measurement in bits.
That being said, we are not able to do much with bits yet, so it becomes almost as fanciful as the electron volt which is decidedly limited to a narrow range of ct6 or ct9 exchange, a rather random place from which to make a determination.
Then you have the other problem with the "standard model of particle mass" which is that even the standard model accepts that fundamental particles like electrons are not particles at all.  Rather than use the precise explanation of AuT that provides the ready explanation in terms of accurate pre and post time elements; the SMOPM ("smop-em") uses probability fields which is a way of estimating what AuT requires, the latter giving a better view of quantum instant states and allowing for superior manipulation as a result,of course.



https://physics.aps.org/articles/v12/129?utm_campaign=weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_source=emailalert

1.1 ev as mass vs a minimum of 8x10^-3 based on M^2 of each mass state.
What you see here is yet another proof of aut where compression states changed based on 2f(x)^(2^x) which AuT predicts comparing favorably to observations.  Its important to remember that amounts of cloud are not measurable even using an energy standard although they are important for understanding function.
This is easily given a rough ct comparison using the millions of ev (10^6) of other ct states which suggests that the Neutrino, in terms of the electron (t12) component is a ct4t6 range component state; something which is potentially supportive of the photon being a ct4t9 state which is a place where I have been leaning for some time given the newly determined proton as a ct4t15 state thing which is also supported in part by these electron volt measurements, although one can readily see minor discrepancies that arise when EV and mass are reconciled. 

energy equivalence of rest mass of electron	0.5109906(15) MeV
energy equivalence of rest mass of proton	938.27231(28) MeV
energy equivalence of rest mass of neutron	939.56563(28) MeV

What this tells us is that neutrinos are manifestations of pretime states which "oscillate" between the the ct4t states in question, all of which appear to be in a determinable range.
The problem arises because anytime you use energy as part of the analysis what you are really doing is comparing pre-time and post-time states and when you use decay characteristics you are ignoring much of the pre-time information and categorizing the rest, especially here, where it is categorized as a single particle to force it into a model as opposed to specific mathematics.

The range concept is Its important to remember that amounts of cloud are not measurable even using an energy standard although they are important for understanding function.

The idea is that what is called a neutrino is a post time “flux” measurement (like the electron field conceptually being called an electron vrs the 5.4 ct4t12 plus cloud states) and as will be shown this appears likely to be a 5.x cloud of ct4t6 moving between a ct4t5 and ct4t7 unstable (odd exponent) matrix.

The same conceptual framework can be used to fully evaluate the reaction of the components in the article and a very similar conceptual framework appears in the patents, sorry, it will not appear here; but the evaluation of this reaction is well worth considering:

 A gaseous source produces tritium atoms (3H${}^3\text{H}$) that undergo beta decay into helium-3 (3He${}^3\text{He}$), electrons (e−${\text{e}}^{-}$), and electron antineutrinos (ν̄ $\overline{𝜈}$)

The newest editions of zombie christmas and science of nostradamus, but I am going to rewrite it.  Keep your eyes open for the next edition of Counselor's sinful kiss, that is also coming.