I agree that there should be no new physics involved except for some form of unknown interaction between here and the source of the signals. I suppose we are left with a question as to whether or not sufficient data is available about closer super nova as compared with those far removed.
It would not surprise me in the least to find that photons behave differently than neutrinos as they travel throughout vast spatial distances. Electromagnetic fields interact with just about everything in space while neutrinos are moving freely except for the effects of gravity. It is exciting to find an unexpected difference which might reveal new phenomena. Now, how many relatively close by nova do they have as reference? It still seems unusual that several hours elapses before the visual light emerges under normal conditions. Could it be that measuring the neutrino arrival times is difficult due to low count numbers? Seems like only a few are captured during an event. Does anyone know of sets of data that show how consistent the two arrival times have been measured in the past, as that would be interesting to compare? It would also be revealing to know how long the neutrino event lasts since that would imply how long the star remains intact. Dave -----Original Message----- From: mixent <mix...@bigpond.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Jul 1, 2014 4:51 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:A complicated vacuum In reply to David Roberson's message of Tue, 1 Jul 2014 10:11:05 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >Of course we have data comparing nearby super nova explosions to those of distant ones. I do not recall anyone finding the delay in relation to the nearby ones. The other issue to consider is that these explosions are extremely energetic. Certainly the amount of time required to tear apart the star is measured in seconds instead of hours. The delay is caused by the photons trying to fight their way through the plasma and gas. Even after the explosion has taken place, some of them still have to fight their way through the expanding plasma cloud, especially if the explosion was asymmetrical, i.e. if there was initially a lot of mass between us and the point where it initiated, or the star was exceptionally large to begin with. In short there are several factor which could effect the delay, so I'm not surprised that they got it a bit wrong. IMO this is a simpler and hence more likely explanation than new physics. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
