Talk:Homestake experiment

Physics High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

South Dakota Low‑importance

	South Dakota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Dakota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of South Dakota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South DakotaWikipedia:WikiProject South DakotaTemplate:WikiProject South DakotaSouth Dakota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Units[edit]

Would it be an idea to either update the article to SI-units, or include a conversion within paranthesises? I came here specifically because I needed to know how much perchloroethylene was used in the experiment. Being a European scientist I then had to find an external converter from gallons to cubic meters. It's my understanding (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Scientific_and_technical_units ) that SI units are generally to be used in articles regarding science, but not being an experienced editor I didn't want to make changes without checking first. /Greger 85.235.1.129 (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First response[edit]

"The first response from the scientific community was that either Bahcall or Davis had made a mistake."

Surely not the whole scientific community? Years before (in 1967), Bruno Pontecorvo had written:

“From an observational point of view the ideal object is the sun. If the oscillation length is smaller than the radius of the sun region effectively producing neutrinos, direct oscillations will be smeared out and unobservable. The only effect on the earth’s surface would be that the flux of observable sun neutrinos must be two times smaller than the total (active and sterile) neutrino flux.” Ssscienccce (talk) 11:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]