Proc. Neutrino Astrophysics - MPP Theory Group
Proc. Neutrino Astrophysics - MPP Theory Group
Proc. Neutrino Astrophysics - MPP Theory Group
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
40<br />
Solar <strong>Neutrino</strong>s: Where We Are and What Is Next?<br />
G. Fiorentini<br />
Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Universitá di Ferrara and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare,<br />
Sezione di Ferrara, I-44100 Ferrara, Italy<br />
What has been Measured?<br />
All five experiments report a deficit of solar neutrinos with respect to the predictions of<br />
Standard Solar Models (SSMs), see Ref. [1].<br />
What Have We Learnt on Solar <strong>Neutrino</strong>s, Independently of SSMs?<br />
Actually, the solar neutrino puzzle (SNP) is not just the discrepancy between experimental<br />
results and the predictions of standard solar models. Rather, experimental results look inconsistent<br />
among each other with the only assumption that the present total neutrino flux can<br />
be deduced from the present solar luminosity, unless something happens to neutrinos during<br />
the trip from Sun to Earth, see Fig. 1 and Refs. [1, 2, 3].<br />
What Has Been Calculated?<br />
Accurate predictions of solar neutrino fluxes are anyhow extremely important. If neutrino<br />
masses (differences) are as small as suggested by several proposed solutions to the SNP, then<br />
the only way to measure neutrino masses is through the interpretation of future solar neutrino<br />
experiments, which requires accurate theoretical predictions of solar properties.<br />
Refined solar models are thus necessary. All these have to be confronted with the powerful<br />
helioseismic constraints, see Ref. [4], particularly for a quantitative (and conservative)<br />
determination of the accuracy of solar properties as deduced from helioseismology.<br />
Recent SSM calculations, using accurate equations of state, recent opacity calculations<br />
and including microscopic diffusion, look in agreement with heliosesimology, see Figs. 2 and 3<br />
and Ref. [4]. Alternative solar models should be as successful as these are [5, 6].<br />
Actually, one can exploit helioseismology within a different strategy. One can relax some<br />
assumptions on the most controversial ingredients of solar models (e.g. opacity and metal<br />
abundance) and determine them by requiring that helioseismic constraints are satisifed. These<br />
helioseismically constrained solar models (HCSM) all yield the same central temperature<br />
within about one percent [7]. The main uncertainties for the determination of solar neutrino<br />
fluxes arise now from nuclear physics measurements. After the succesful LUNA experiments<br />
at LNGS [8], the main uncertainties are now from the 3 He+ 4 He and 7 Be+p reactions.<br />
What Is Missing?<br />
In a prophetical paper of 1946 [9] Bruno Pontecorvo wrote: “direct proof of the existence of<br />
the neutrino ... must be based on experiments the interpretation of which does not require<br />
the law of conservation of energy, i.e. on experiments in which some characteristic process<br />
produced by free neutrinos ... is observed.”