quote:
If what you say is true about there being three types of neutrinos ( and this isn't just a continuation of the endless "force carrier parade") then I guess LaViolette and thereby myself are out of touch with the latest. As I mentioned I have a copy of Subquantum Kinetics last updated in 2003. I will look for more recent updates wherein he may address this data. Well it's been enjoyable anyway.
According to Wikipedia two types of neutrino had been discovered by 1962, the third was predicted in 1975 and proved to exist in 2000
neutrino
In 1962 Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger showed that more than one type of neutrino exists by first detecting interactions of the muon neutrino
The first detection of tau neutrino interactions was announced in summer of 2000 by the DONUT collaboration at Fermilab
Also, the neutrino problem was explained in 2001 - and the explanation had supporting evidence by 1998, although by my own memory the solution had been proposed before then.
Neutrino oscillation
...neutrino oscillation was not conclusively identified as the source of the deficit until the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory provided clear evidence of neutrino flavor change in 2001.
I would have thought that a 2003 update would have had time to deal with this issue. It would have been impossible for anyone following physics news in the mainstream media to have missed the reports from the Sudbury team (I saw them!
Ghostly particle mystery 'solved'). And there was evidence of neutrino oscillations a few years before that. And the possibility that the problem was explained by neutrino oscillations goes back to the 1980s at least....
So, just looking at the points I've discussed, we've had one highly questionable "verification", one failed prediction being passed off as a success and a "solution" to a problem which had been solved more than a year before the revised text you are using was published. This is not an impressive record.