This topic announces the eBook and philosophy project 
cosmicphilosophy.org that seeks to prove that philosophy can be used to explore and understand the cosmos far beyond the potential of science.
In another topic I showed that simple philosophical questions easily reveal that black holes shrink with infalling matter, and that black holes grow with structure complexity growth in their environment. In ancient cultures black holes have often been described as âmotherâ of the Universe. This might reveal the potential of philosophy for cosmological exploration since science only found evidence for the idea a month after my publication on this forum:
The neutrino case could be especially interesting for philosophy since the neutrino was postulated in an attempt to escape âinfinite divisibilityâ, which reveals that this is a case that belongs to philosophy.
Philosophy has a history of exploring the idea of infinite divisibility through various well-known philosophical thought experiments, including Zenoâs Paradox, The Ship of Theseus, The Sorites Paradox and Betrand Russellâs Infinite Regress Argument.
The Attempt to Escape âInfinite Divisibilityâ
During the 1920s, physicists observed that the energy spectrum of the emerging electrons in nuclear beta decay processes was âcontinuousâ. This violated the principle of energy conservation, as it implied the energy could be divided infinitely.
The neutrino provided a way to âescapeâ the implication of infinite divisibility and it necessitated the mathematical concept âfractionality itselfâ which is represented by the strong force.
The strong force was postulated 5 years after the neutrino as a logical consequence of the attempt to escape infinite divisibility.
âMissing Energyâ as Only Evidence for Neutrinos
The eBook case on cosmicphilosophy.org reveals that âmissing energyâ is the only evidence for the existence of neutrinos.
After a fierce debate with GPT-4âs attempt to defend neutrino physics, it concluded:
"Your statement [about âmissing energyâ being the only evidence] accurately reflects the current state of neutrino physics:
- All neutrino detection methods ultimately rely on indirect measurements and mathematics.
- These indirect measurements are fundamentally based on the concept of âmissing energyâ.
- While there are various phenomena observed in different experimental setups (solar, atmospheric, reactor, etc.), the interpretation of these phenomena as evidence for neutrinos still stems from the original âmissing energyâ problem.
The defense of the neutrino concept often involves the notion of âreal phenomenaâ, such as timing and a correlation between observations and events. For example, the Cowan-Reines experiment supposedly âdetected antineutrinos from a nuclear reactorâ.
From a philosophical perspective it doesnât matter whether there is a phenomenon to explain. At question is whether it is valid to posit the neutrino particle and the only evidence for neutrinos ultimately is just âmissing energyâ.
âMissing Energyâ as Only Evidence for Neutrinos
The âcontinuityâ of the observed energy spectrum refers to the fact that the energies of the electrons form a smooth, uninterrupted range of values, rather than being limited to discrete, quantized energy levels.
The term âenergy spectrumâ can be somewhat misleading, as it is more fundamentally rooted in the observed mass values.
The root of the problem is Albert Einsteinâs famous equation E=mc² that establishes the equivalence between energy (E) and mass (m), mediated by the speed of light (c) and the dogmatic assumption of a matter-mass correlation, which combined provide the basis for the idea of energy conservation.
The mass of the emitted electron was less than the mass difference between the initial neutron and the final proton. This âmissing massâ was unaccounted for, suggesting the existence of the neutrino particle that would âcarry the energy away unseenâ.
This âmissing energyâ problem was resolved in 1930 by Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli with his proposal of the neutrino:
âI have done a terrible thing, I have postulated a particle that cannot be detected.â
In 1956, physicists Clyde Cowan and Frederick Reines designed an experiment to directly detect neutrinos produced in a nuclear reactor. Their experiment involved placing a large tank of liquid scintillator near a nuclear reactor.
When a neutrinoâs weak force supposedly interacts with the protons (hydrogen nuclei) in the scintillator, these protons can undergo a process called inverse beta decay. In this reaction, an antineutrino interacts with a proton to produce a positron and a neutron. The positron produced in this interaction quickly annihilates with an electron, producing two gamma ray photons. The gamma rays then interact with the scintillator material, causing it to emit a flash of visible light (scintillation).
The production of neutrons in the inverse beta decay process represents an increase in mass and an increase in structural complexity of the system:
- Increased number of particles in the nucleus, leading to more complex nuclear structure.
- Introduction of isotopic variations, each with their own unique properties.
- Enabling a wider range of nuclear interactions and processes.
The âmissing energyâ due to increased mass was the fundamental indicator that led to the conclusion that neutrinos must exist as real physical particles.
âMissing Energyâ Still the Only Evidence
The concept of âmissing energyâ is still the only âevidenceâ for the existence of neutrinos.
Modern detectors, like those used in neutrino oscillation experiments, still rely on the beta decay reaction, similar to the original Cowan-Reines experiment.
In Calorimetric Measurements for example, the concept of âmissing energyâ detection is related to the decrease in structural complexity observed in beta deca processes. The reduced mass and energy of the final state, compared to the initial neutron, is what leads to the energy imbalance that is attributed to the unobserved anti-neutrino that is supposedly âflying it away unseenâ.
The 99% âMissing Energyâ in Supernova
The 99% of energy that supposedly âvanishesâ in a supernova reveals the root of the problem.
When a star goes supernova it dramatically and exponentially increases its gravitational mass in its core which should correlate with a significant release of thermal energy. However, the observed thermal energy accounts for less than 1% of the expected energy. To account for the remaining 99% of the expected energy release, astrophysics attributes this âmissingâ or âdisappearedâ energy to neutrinos that are supposedly carrying it away.
Using philosophy it is easy to recognize the mathematical dogmatism involved in the attempt to âshovel 99% energy under the carpetâ using neutrinos.
The 99% âMissing Energyâ represented by the strong force
The strong force has never been directly measured but through mathematical dogmatism scientists today believe that they will be able to measure it with more precise tools, as evidenced by a 2023 publication in Symmetry Magazine:
To small to observe
The mass of the quarks are responsible for only about 1 percent of the nucleon mass," says Katerina Lipka, an experimentalist working at the German research center DESY, where the gluonâthe force-carrying particle for the strong forceâwas first discovered in 1979.
The rest is the energy contained in the motion of the gluons. The mass of matter is given by the energy of the strong force."Whatâs so hard about measuring the strong force? | symmetry magazine
From a philosophical perspective it would be invalid to consider the strong force as a physical entity that accounts for 99% of the mass of the proton.
The question thus remains: what is the origin of the 99% mass value that mathematics cannot account for when the strong force is considered a mathematical fiction?
The electron 
ice chapter reveals that the strong force is mathematical fractionality itself which implies that this energy is missing as well from the perspective of mathematics. This fractionality is also fundamental to the evidence for the neutrino, as it represents â infinite divisibility that science attempted to escape.
In summary:
- the âmissing energyâ as evidence for neutrinos
- the 99% energy that the strong force represents in the form of mass
- the 99% energy that âdisappearsâ in a supernova and that is supposedly carried away by neutrinos
These refer to the same âmissing energyâ and are rooted in the same dogmatic fallacy regarding mass.
When the neutrinos are taken out of the consideration, what is observed is the âspontaneous and instantaneousâ emergence of negative electric charge in the form of leptons (electron) which correlates with âstructure manifestationâ (order out of non-order).
The evidence is plainly obvious when one uses philosophy.
Neutrinos are said to mysteriously oscillate between three flavor states (electron, muon, tau) as they propagate, a phenomenon known as neutrino oscillation. Each flavor has its own mass so the neutrino is to morph its own mass.
The evidence for neutrino oscillation is rooted in the same âmissing energyâ problem in beta decay. The three neutrino flavors (electron, muon, and tau neutrinos) are directly related to the corresponding emerged charged leptons that each have a different mass.
This is a lead for strong philosophical evidence: mathematics introduces a âto tiny to observe time scaleâ through neutrino interaction which can potentially introduce flaws or errors in nature itself. From a system perspective, the negative electric charge representing leptons (electron) emerges spontaneously and instantaneous where it not for the neutrino to âcauseâ their emergence.
The observed infinite divisibility context of the energy spectrum (which applies to mass) reveals that in reality, nature cannot fundamentally be flawed or contain errors. Exploring this more deeply enables to establish strong philosophical evidence that the neutrino concept is invalid.
The Cosmic Philosophy ebook is currently being written. I am considering to create an ebook bundle with an introduction and major philosophical works in the category, such as those of Gottfried Leibniz, of which I personally wonder how he has managed to achieve some of his insights in 1714 when considering that it might align with what is actually the case. Hopefully the project inspires people to âthink out of the boxâ and to not feel limited by mathematics.
So far, it costed a few weeks time. AI does provide advantages in this regard. Delving through all the available papers by hand would never have enabled to gain various of the insights used in the case.
Tips, suggestions or criticism are welcome!
âThis ebook will show how philosophy can be used to explore and understand the cosmos far beyond the potential of science.â
https://cosmicphilosophy.org/