Tangentially related if you're interested: I worked on IceCube and ARA as an undergrad in college and wrote a lengthy paper on the autonomous power stations we built for the ARA neutrino detectors at the South Pole.<p><a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1253" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1253</a>
I was hoping O'Shea Jackson had gotten into physics, but apparently not. IceCube, in this case, is a Neutrino Observatory is the first detector of its kind, designed to observe the cosmos from deep within the South Pole ice.<p>I've not heard of it before, looks very, uh, cool :-)<p><a href="https://icecube.wisc.edu/about-us/overview/" rel="nofollow">https://icecube.wisc.edu/about-us/overview/</a>
The headline reminds me of the expression, "Theory is underdetermined by data" [0].<p>Seems to me that the only way the headline could be true is if we use the older definition of "prove": to <i>test</i>.<p>I imagine this is just another case of a university PR writer displaying his ignorance, to the great consternation of the researchers.<p>[0] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdetermination" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdetermination</a>
This talk[1] from 2019 at Perimeter gives a nice and accessible overview of IceCube and how it detects neutrinos.<p>[1]: <a href="http://pirsa.org/19040075/" rel="nofollow">http://pirsa.org/19040075/</a>
wow, my friend went to install some servers for this at the south pole in.... must have been 2006? It's pretty crazy how they drill these deep holes in the ice, then drop baubles on a cable where the baubles actually have some amount of computing power to process the incoming signals.
A long long time ago I was sitting with my mother in the living room when the big glass ashtray on the round table became a thousand pieces that dispersed like a liquid with a sand-like sound.<p>Someone told me that cosmic rays could do that. Scary.