Paper detail

Comment on "Damping of neutrino oscillations, decoherence and the lengths of neutrino wave packets''

We point out three apparent inconsistencies in the treatment of oscillation coherence from reactor neutrino and source neutrino experiments in recent paper "Damping of neutrino oscillations, decoherence and the lengths of neutrino wave packets''. First, that the dependence of the oscillation probability upon the subsequent interactions of entangled recoil particles implies causality violations and in some situations superluminal signaling; second, that integrating over a non-orthogonal basis for the entangled recoil leads to unphysical effects; and third, that the question of what interactions serve to measure the position of the initial state particle remains ambiguous. These points taken together appear to undermine the claim made therein that the effects of wave packet separation must be strictly unobservable in reactor and radioactive source based neutrino experiments.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.