Paper detail

Is there a problem with low energy SN1987A neutrinos?

(abridged) We study the low energy events observed by Kamiokande-II. We focus on the event 6 of 6.3 MeV and also on the other events that at 1 sigma fall below the energy threshold: events 3,4,10,12. The volume distribution is not a uniform distribution at 3 sigma, that suggests the presence of background events close or at the border of the volume used for the analysis, including the events 3,4,10. We checked the expected energy distribution assuming that the signal is due to nubar(e)p-->e+n and that the average antineutrino energy is 14 MeV. The agreement with the observations is not perfect but it is acceptable at the 11 % confidence level if we include the peak of low energy background events; otherwise, we face a 2.9 sigma problem. The expected energy distribution implies that the evidence for supernova neutrinos is at 10 sigma and that 1-3 background events are plausible. This conclusion does not change strongly when we model the time distribution of the signal taking into account the presence of an initial luminous phase of neutrino emission. This suggests however that some of the early events are due to supernova neutrinos and not to background. In summary, we formulate the hypothesis that some of the observed low energy events are due to background and that some among them belong to a peculiar phase of emission, that could be further characterized by low energy neutrinos. Such an interpretation diminishes to a minimum the postulated number of background events and thus improves the agreement between the a priori and the a posteriori expectations on the number of background events. We argue on these grounds that there is no significant disagreement between the average energy of the supernova neutrinos seen in Kamiokande-II and the conventional expectations.

preprint2007arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.