Using neutrinos detected by IceCube to measure mass of the Earth

November 6, 2018 by Bob Yirka, Phys.org report
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

A trio of researchers from CSIC-Universitat de València and Universitat de Barcelona has used data from the IceCube detector in Antarctica to measure Earth's mass. In their paper published in the journal Nature Physics, Andrea Donini, Sergio Palomares-Ruiz and Jordi Salvado describe using data describing neutrinos passing through the Earth to learn more about the interior of the planet. Véronique Van Elewyck with Paris Diderot University has written a News and Views piece on the work done by the team in the same journal issue.

Currently, scientists use calculations based on gravitational pull and readings from seismic detectors to measure the mass of the Earth and its density. In this new effort, the researchers have taken a different approach—looking at the number of neutrinos that make their way through the planet.

The IceCube Neutrino Observatory was established back in 2005. It is made up of thousands of sensors situated under the ice to detect neutrinos that have passed through the Earth. Neutrinos are weakly interacting particles—those that pass through the Earth are known as atmospheric neutrinos because they arise from collisions between cosmic rays and the Earth's atmosphere. In this new effort, the researchers used data from IceCube from 2011 to 2012—it was not publicly released until 2016. IceCube detects low-energy neutrinos—high-energy neutrinos are not able to make it all the way through the planet.

To calculate the Earth's mass, the researchers measured how much of the neutrino stream produced by atmospheric collisions made it through the planet. To calculate the density of Earth's layers, they counted how many neutrinos were able to get through the planet at different angles to IceCube.

The researchers report that their findings agreed with measurements of the planet taken using traditional methods. But they also note that as the years pass and IceCube collects more data, measurements of the planet using will become more precise. Van Elewyck suggests that as other neutrino-sensing stations are set up in other places, it should be possible to conduct a full tridimensional analysis of the planet offering information not available through other means.

Explore further: Possible explanation for excess of electron neutrinos detected by IceCube Neutrino Observatory

More information: Andrea Donini et al. Neutrino tomography of Earth, Nature Physics (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41567-018-0319-1

Related Stories

Researchers at IceCube detect record energy neutrinos

April 26, 2013

(Phys.org) —Researchers at the Antarctic research station IceCube are reporting that they've detected the highest ever energy neutrinos ever observed. In their paper they've uploaded to the preprint server arXiv, the team ...

Mysterious IceCube event may be caused by a tau neutrino

June 19, 2018

Eight years ago, the IceCube detector, a research center located at the South Pole to detect neutrinos emanating from the cosmos, was commissioned. Three years later, it began to register the first momentous results. The ...

Recommended for you

When electric fields make spins swirl

November 14, 2018

We are reaching the limits of silicon capabilities in terms of data storage density and speed of memory devices. One of the potential next-generation data storage elements is the magnetic skyrmion. A team at the Center for ...

Structure of fossil-fuel source rocks is finally decoded

November 13, 2018

The fossil fuels that provide much of the world's energy orginate in a type of rock known as kerogen, and the potential for recovering these fuels depends crucially on the size and connectedness of the rocks' internal pore ...

10 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Hyperfuzzy
1.8 / 5 (5) Nov 08, 2018
No Logic & unnecessary and insufficient.
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (6) Nov 08, 2018
No Logic & unnecessary and insufficient.


Which describes your comment perfectly
Hyperfuzzy
1 / 5 (4) Nov 08, 2018
No Logic & unnecessary and insufficient.


Which describes your comment perfectly


Expound.

You know this is Logical based upon citations or what? Or is it something you believe? Do you have necessary conditions met? Are they sufficient? You based this w/o citations upon what Logic?

Is it that you have no other statement relating or anything scientifically known and certain and not a search for something that does not exist or is poorly defined! So what are you saying. That this paper makes sense. OK. I did not understand that you are not technically knowledgeable, you mad 'cause I disagree?
jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 08, 2018
OK. I did not understand that you are not technically knowledgeable, you mad 'cause I disagree?


Doesn't matter what you disagree with. You are an unqualified loon on a comments section. Yes? Now, STFU, you ignorant arse.
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 08, 2018
You know this is Logical based upon citations or what?
given your lack of physical evidence, all that is required for a refute is to simply state it's wrong
in this case, he is grammatically and logically correct considering your dearth of evidence
Do you have necessary conditions met?
met and explained

references: https://www.lawmi...e-claim/

So what are you saying
that you have no other statement relating or anything scientifically known and certain and [your comment is] something that does not exist or is poorly defined!
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (7) Nov 08, 2018
You know this is Logical based upon citations or what?
given your lack of physical evidence, all that is required for a refute is to simply state it's wrong
in this case, he is grammatically and logically correct considering your dearth of evidence
Do you have necessary conditions met?
met and explained

references: https://www.lawmi...e-claim/

So what are you saying
that you have no other statement relating or anything scientifically known and certain and [your comment is] something that does not exist or is poorly defined!


Add to that that his mother was likely a hamster, and his father smelt of elderberries.

https://www.youtu...4zULKFDU
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 08, 2018
We should be able to see the Earth's core with this technology in time. Maybe there're hints right now.
jonesdave
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 08, 2018
We should be able to see the Earth's core with this technology in time. Maybe there're hints right now.


Never mind that Da Schneib, what about Biggus Dickus?

https://www.youtu...G2a2hL6U
Hyperfuzzy
1 / 5 (3) Nov 08, 2018
OK. I did not understand that you are not technically knowledgeable, you mad 'cause I disagree?


Doesn't matter what you disagree with. You are an unqualified loon on a comments section. Yes? Now, STFU, you ignorant arse.

Yeah, he mad
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4 / 5 (4) Nov 11, 2018
Cool, they can see the core and it may be larger and denser than expected. Also, they may eventually observe or reject a dark matter contribution.

On the more fact empty than usual troll comments: 'I said, he said' is not an argument.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.