BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//CERN//INDICO//EN
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Should we search for neutral nuclei? The tetraneutron story
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE-TIME:20250522T103000Z
DTEND;VALUE=DATE-TIME:20250522T113000Z
DTSTAMP;VALUE=DATE-TIME:20260611T110041Z
UID:indico-event-8079@indico.ific.uv.es
DESCRIPTION:In 1911 Rutherford discovered the atomic nucleus\, and in 1919
  he demonstrated that the proton\, the nucleus of hydrogen\, was the carri
 er of its positive charge and a building block of all the heavier nuclei. 
 Finally\, in 1932 the other building block was found\, the neutron\, which
  acts as a nuclear glue that holds heavier nuclei together against Coulomb
  repulsion. A natural question soon emerged: could this glue form neutral 
 nuclei on its own? A quest for these multineutrons started in the 1960s\, 
 when techniques to evetually probe them became accessible. In 2002 this qu
 est had been running for 40 years already without success and was fading\,
  but then a first positive signal consistent with a tetraneutron was obser
 ved at GANIL.\n\nThis result shook the community at several levels. The im
 portance of the potential consequences made it reach the media in many\, m
 ore or less reliable\, ways. Nevertheless\, theory was unable to explain t
 he existence of a tetraneutron. Some colleagues\, from either theory or ex
 periment\, did not believe that our signal was significant enough. And eve
 ryone expected a stronger confirmation\, or eventually a refutation. Howev
 er\, nothing happened in the next years\, at least nothing that fits the s
 treamlined format of standard scientific publications. And yet many things
  did happen! But most of them had little to do with physics\, and those th
 at had did not belong to the linear success tales that we find in physics 
 books and journals.\n\nWe will use this first 4n signal to discuss differe
 nt aspects of basic research. How does/should it work? Why should we searc
 h for things that are not supposed to exist? Should we plan our search for
  the unknown? How should we communicate about experimental failures? Shoul
 d we allow them? How should we interact with the media? We will also revie
 w the present and future of this research. In 2016 something else happened
 \, a new although weak "tetraneutron" signal was reported at RIKEN\, and a
  recent Nature article showed a strong confirmation of a "correlated 4n si
 gnal"\, not a tetraneutron. Is it just a semantic issue? Why does this wor
 d matter so much? We will conclude with the next steps in a field that rem
 ains still open.\n\nLink to the colloquium\n\n \n\n\n\nhttps://indico.ifi
 c.uv.es/event/8079/
LOCATION:PCUV Salón de Actos
URL:https://indico.ific.uv.es/event/8079/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR