What the paper argues (plain English): Two “natural experiments” showcase how the flux→drift template plays out in the wild:
Sgr A* (our Galactic-center black hole) occasionally flares with luminosity \(L\!\sim\!10^{29}\,\text{W}\) lasting \(\Delta t\!\sim\!10^4\) s. Even for a pulsar right there at \(r\!=\!1.2\times10^{13}\) m, the implied time-potential step is only \(\Delta\Phi\!\sim\!-6.9\times10^{-25}\) — far below present pulsar-timing sensitivity. Conclusion: conceptually clean, but sub-threshold today.
Galactic core-collapse supernova (SN): the neutrino burst is a gigantic outbound flux, \(L_\nu\!\sim\!3\times10^{45}\,\text{W}\) for \(\sim10\) s. At a typical Galactic distance \(r\!\sim\!10\) kpc, this gives \(\Delta\Phi\!\sim\!+8\times10^{-19}\). That’s within roughly an order of current optical-clock stability, making it a promising “target of opportunity.” The strategy: phase-lock your template to the neutrino burst and cross-correlate a network of precision clocks.
Operational trigger & requirements (how to run it):
Quick scaling intuition: integrate the drift law \(\partial_t\Phi\approx -(G/c^4)\,L(t)/r\) over the burst → \(\Delta\Phi\!\approx\!-(G/c^4)\,E/r\), where \(E\) is the radiated energy crossing your sphere. The SN simply has the enormous \(E\) that Sgr A* flares lack at accessible \(r\). (Numbers are those quoted above from the paper.)
Symbol | Name | Meaning (units) | Typical value/example | Metaphor |
---|---|---|---|---|
\(L(t)\) | Luminosity | Power crossing a sphere at \(r\) (W) | Sgr A*: \(10^{29}\) W; SN: \(3\times10^{45}\) W | “Brightness push” on time |
\(\Delta\Phi\) | Time-potential step | Integrated drift from a transient (–) | Sgr A*: \(-6.9\times10^{-25}\); SN: \(+8\times10^{-19}\) | “Net nudge of the time-dial” |
\(r\) | Distance (areal) | Source→clock separation (m) | Sgr A*: \(1.2\times10^{13}\) m; SN: \(10\) kpc | “Lever arm” (farther = weaker) |
SNEWS 2.0 | Neutrino trigger | Multi-detector alert for Galactic SNe | Use ±6 h, ≥ 1 Hz logging | “Fire alarm” for the burst |
\(\lambda\) | Flux→drift gain | Predicted slope \(G/(c^4 r)\) (s²·kg\(^{-1}\)·m\(^{-1}\)) | Check sign, zero-lag, 1/r | “Gear ratio” from flux to drift |
Next up: Step 11 — Sensitivity & feasibility (bounds-first): ideal analysis limits, real-world noise, and what you actually report.