sciencebriefs
13:00in productionCh. 1 · A tank of cleaning fluid underground/ 13:00 · ceiling 15 min
Physics · Astronomy & space

Solar neutrino problem

Ray Davis's underground tank of cleaning fluid counted only about a third of the solar neutrinos theory predicted for three decades, a gap eventually traced not to a flawed experiment but to neutrinos changing type on the way to Earth.

From 1970, Ray Davis ran a detector built from a 380 cubic metre tank of dry-cleaning fluid buried nearly 1,500 metres underground in the Homestake Gold Mine in South Dakota, designed to catch electron neutrinos streaming from the sun by counting the rare radioactive argon atoms they produced in the fluid. The count consistently came in at roughly a third to two thirds of what John Bahcall's calculations from the standard solar model predicted, a discrepancy that became known as the solar neutrino problem and persisted for decades despite repeated checks of both the experiment and the theory. The eventual resolution, confirmed by the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory around 2001, was that neutrinos oscillate between three types on their journey from the sun, and Davis's detector could only register one of those types, meaning his measurements had been accurate all along; the missing neutrinos were arriving in a form his equipment could not see. Davis shared the 2002 Nobel Prize in Physics for the original detection, and researchers who later confirmed the oscillation mechanism shared the 2015 prize.

PhysicsAstronomy & spacePhysicsAstronomyPhysics across the network →
Chapters & takeaways6
  1. 0:08
    A tank of cleaning fluid underground

    Ray Davis built a detector from a large tank of dry-cleaning fluid buried nearly 1,500 metres underground to catch neutrinos from the sun.

  2. 2:10
    A persistent shortfall

    From the start, the detector counted roughly a third to two thirds of the neutrinos that solar theory predicted, a gap that held for decades.

  3. 4:20
    Blaming the wrong culprit

    Early explanations focused on possible errors in Davis's experiment or flaws in the standard model of the sun, rather than in neutrinos themselves.

  4. 6:30
    Ruling out a cooler sun

    Independent evidence from helioseismology and neutrino spectrum data undermined proposed fixes that assumed the sun's core was different from the standard model.

  5. 8:40
    Neutrinos changing type in flight

    The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory showed around 2001 that neutrinos oscillate between three types, and Davis's detector could register only one.

  6. 10:50
    Both sides had been right

    The resolution vindicated both the original measurements and the underlying solar theory, and both achievements were separately recognised with Nobel Prizes.

Worth your time?

Yes. Study the whole thing.

4.5/ 5
What works
  • specifies the actual scale of the discrepancy rather than treating it as vague
  • shows how competing explanations were tested and ruled out one at a time
  • credits both the original experimental result and its eventual theoretical explanation with separate, deserved recognition
What does not
  • does not claim the original solar model predictions were perfectly precise, only that they were broadly vindicated
  • cannot be fully appreciated without the multi-decade timeline, which is part of the substance of the story
Study it if
  • readers who enjoy a decades-long scientific puzzle with a genuinely satisfying resolution
  • anyone curious how physicists distinguish a flawed experiment from a flawed theory
  • people interested in a case where both competing sides of a dispute turned out to be correct
Skip it if
  • readers wanting a quick answer rather than a discrepancy that took over thirty years to resolve
The written brief3 min read

A tank of cleaning fluid underground

The experiment at the centre of this story was built to catch a famously hard-to-detect particle. Ray Davis constructed a detector consisting of a 380 cubic metre tank of perchloroethylene, an ordinary dry-cleaning fluid, placed nearly 1,500 metres underground in the Homestake Gold Mine in South Dakota, where the surrounding rock would shield it from interfering cosmic rays. The chlorine atoms in the fluid could occasionally capture an electron neutrino from the sun and convert into a radioactive form of argon, which Davis periodically extracted and counted, giving a direct measure of how many solar neutrinos of that type were reaching Earth.

A persistent shortfall

From when the experiment began operating in 1970, the count consistently fell short of what theory predicted. John Bahcall’s calculations, based on the standard model of how the sun generates energy through nuclear fusion, predicted a certain rate of neutrino captures, but Davis’s tank registered only roughly a third to two thirds of that expected number, and this shortfall persisted through repeated runs of the experiment over more than two decades of continuous operation, becoming known as the solar neutrino problem rather than a one-off anomaly that might resolve itself with better statistics or a longer run.

Blaming the wrong culprit

The gap between prediction and measurement was large and stable enough that it could not be waved away, and it was unclear at first which side of the comparison was at fault. Some researchers initially suspected an error in Davis’s experimental technique or equipment, while others considered whether the standard solar model itself needed revision, including proposals that the sun’s core might be cooler than assumed or that nuclear reactions inside it might occasionally pause. Repeated scrutiny of both the Homestake apparatus and the underlying theoretical calculations failed to identify a fault in either.

Ruling out a cooler sun

Independent evidence made proposed fixes to the solar model increasingly hard to sustain. Helioseismology, the study of vibrations propagating through the sun, produced measurements consistent with the standard solar model’s assumptions about the sun’s interior, and the detailed spectrum of neutrino energies detected did not fit a scenario in which the sun’s core was simply cooler than expected, since a cooler core is inconsistent with the specific pattern of energies measured. This left researchers with a genuine puzzle: neither obvious explanation, a flawed detector or a flawed sun, fit the accumulating evidence.

Neutrinos changing type in flight

The resolution came from a property of neutrinos themselves rather than from the sun or the detector. Neutrinos come in three types, and theoretical work dating back to a 1968 proposal by Bruno Pontecorvo suggested that if neutrinos have mass, they can oscillate, changing from one type to another as they travel. The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory in Canada, publishing results around 2001, confirmed this directly by measuring all three neutrino types together and finding that electron neutrinos made up only about a third of the total, in close agreement with the standard solar model’s overall prediction once oscillation is accounted for.

Both sides had been right

This meant Davis’s detector, sensitive only to electron neutrinos, had been counting accurately all along; the remaining two thirds of the predicted neutrinos were arriving at Earth having changed into the other two types along the way, invisible to his chlorine-based method. Ray Davis shared the 2002 Nobel Prize in Physics for the original detection work, and researchers who established neutrino oscillation, including Takaaki Kajita and Arthur McDonald, shared the 2015 prize for confirming the mechanism. The episode stands as a rare case where a persistent, decades-long discrepancy turned out to vindicate both sides of the original disagreement rather than exposing an error in either.

Same field · Physics4 of 183
11:00
Abdus Salam
9:49
Albert Einstein
13:00
Positron1932
9:53
André-Marie Ampère
Up next in Science

Massively parallel sequencing

· 13:00

Reading DNA one lane at a time cost the Human Genome Project years and roughly a hundred million dollars. Spreading millions of short reads across one flow cell instead brought that down toward a few hundred dollars, trading length and certainty for volume.

Play nextBack to Physics
13:00