For context, 120 PeV is about 10% the kinetic energy of a ping pong ball during typical play.
Close, but ackshually...
Bodybuilders just oil up and pose in beauty pageants.
1 horsepower is basically one 250-pound bench press in one second. (550 foot pounds of work; the aforementioned bench press assumes a 2.2-foot stroke length.)
Most bodybuilders and serious weight lifters can do that, but they can't keep it up for long.
(To be clear, that's sustained effort over time, not just momentary. Athletically trained humans can do about 1 HP of peak momentary effort, and around 0.3 HP if sustained over time.)
James Watt just picked the smallest possible value of horse when defining the unit so he could sell more steam engines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qxTKtlvaVE (donut, How Much Horsepower is a Horse?)
Seriously though, a 15A kettle sounds great.
Don't care. Still have the old ones, and whatever the electrician wired as '120V 3-phase AC' for the full US-style range in the US.
> This means that they should be typeset in the same character set as other common nouns (e.g. Latin alphabet in English, Cyrillic script in Russian, etc.), following the usual grammatical and orthographical rules of the context language. For example, in English and French, even when the unit is named after a person and its symbol begins with a capital letter, the unit name in running text should start with a lowercase letter (e.g., newton, hertz, pascal) and is capitalised only at the beginning of a sentence and in headings and publication titles.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units#...
But now I'm wondering what percentage of the useful thermal power in a nuclear power plant is produced by the neutrinos created in the reactions (the infinitesimally small fraction that happen to interact with the matter within the reactor, that is).
Left neutrino have weak hypercharge, so they are produce by weak interactions and are detected using the weak interaction. And also gravity.
Right neutrinos (if they exist) have no weak hypercharge so they only interact by gravity.
But it's still just a single tiny particle, so it's not a lot of total energy.
It's like how you can lift a heavy weight for a second, but that's all you can do. You would need to be able to lift it for hours to be useful as a replacement for a crane. Same idea: Intensity vs total work.
From nothing, to detectable, to lethal, to big boom?
My intuition would be "detectable" but I don't know enough to do the maths.
And by the way, I am using the mass-energy, not proper mass, because the question is crazy enough not to even consider what would be the mass of a neutrino.
The MFP of a 120 PeV neutrino in lead would be something like 10 kilometers, I think.
The probability of interaction of neutrinos with matter increases with the energy. I've asked o1 to estimate the mean free path of a 120 PeV neutrino in water and it came up with 1000km. So let's say, conservatively, that 10^-7 of the total energy gets deposited in your body when the beam goes through. The mass equivalent of a ping pong ball is about 2.5x10^14 J, which gives us 2.5x10^7 J total, or about 6kg TNT equivalent. This is only an order-of-magnitude estimate, but it would definitely not be healthy.
So BIG boom.
Since the velocity is so close to the speed of light, you can think of this like the energy released by annihilating a ping pong ball made of antimatter.
Edit: Commenter asked what would happen if they "hit", so I'm assuming a hypothetical 100% collision. But yes to stop 1/e of a neutrino beam with normal matter, you'd need a light year of lead.
Unless you get thrown back by ping pong balls normally, I think you'd be fine.
But also neutrinos don't typically collide with things very easily, they're more likely to pass through you without you ever knowing.
In the wrong spot, this sounds to me like it kills you?
Nothing to be afraid of, of course, for the reason you mentioned. Just wondering, xkcd "what if" style