China has finished building its Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO), a bittersweet development given that the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) has been in limbo for years. Both JUNO and INO were designed to study subatomic particles called neutrinos, which are very hard to catch because they rarely interact with matter. This is why both INO and JUNO are huge: the more matter there is, the more interactions there will be between neutrinos and matter, and thus more opportunities for study.

Progress on JUNO

However, this size was perhaps the original trigger of the INO’s downfall, so to speak, in India. Because the INO detector was so massive (weighing 50 kilotonnes), it could not be operated from inside a lab nor could scientists situate its detector in an existing facility. Instead, the INO collaboration had planned to install the detector inside a mountain in Theni in Tamil Nadu, together with other research facilities. The mountain’s rock was to serve as a natural shield for the detector, obviating the need for a separate structure, which would have been expensive.

However, the scale of the construction activity in the area and the involvement of the Department of Atomic Energy, which was helping fund the project, spooked the locals and spurred local leaders to draw political mileage from that. The INO collaboration also erred (in hindsight) by not following procedure and by not estimating how controversial the project could become, which, if it had done, would have helped it respond to and manage certain public sentiments better.

In the late 2010s, these delays were painful as China moved in leaps to realise JUNO. The ‘pain’ was because the INO collaboration was hoping to secure a limited pool of grants and investments from foreign governments to operate the detector. China expected to complete JUNO by 2020 but that turned out to be five years too soon. If it had said it would aim for 2025, would the INO have had a better chance by no longer having a tight deadline? Maybe not but it wouldn’t have been implausible either.

Today, while the INO remains stalled, JUNO has released its first analyses. The JUNO team uploaded two preprint papers on November 18. One reported the “initial performance results of the JUNO detector”. Its author list reveals the sort of international collaboration India was hoping for, with researchers from Armenia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Pakistan, Russia, Slovakia, Thailand, the U.K., and the U.S. participating.

It is not clear why there are no researchers from India. Journalist Jatan Mehta has documented a similar issue in the space science sphere: researchers from India were conspicuous by their absence in the (first) list of applications to access the rocks China had brought back from the moon on its Chang’e-5 mission in 2020. India has a long history in neutrino physics and analysing lunar samples, and boasts of many excellent scholars in these fields.

The second preprint paper reported the object of INO’s study. Even though neutrinos are so elusive, physicists have discovered that they come in three types, or flavours, and that they can oscillate between these as they travel through space.

Figuring out how the three neutrino masses are ordered is an important open question — and it is related to neutrino oscillations, which are in turn described by three figures called θ-12 (“theta one two”), θ-13, and θ-23. Previous experiments have pinned down θ-13, and JUNO and INO were conceived to use this prior knowledge to determine the neutrino mass ordering. In the second paper, the JUNO collaboration reported that it had measured θ-12 very precisely, in a way broadly consistent with previous findings.

On the back of this, Institute of High Energy Physics scientist and JUNO project manager and spokesperson Yifang Wang had said, “With this level of accuracy, JUNO will soon determine the neutrino mass ordering, test the three-flavour oscillation framework, and search for new physics beyond it.”

Rising bar

While we can debate the way the INO collaboration (at times), bureaucrats, political leaders, and some activists conducted themselves during the saga, one must acknowledge that in this domain, missing the bus on one occasion does not mean you can catch the next one; it means the next one has to be something more sophisticated than a bus for your efforts to mean anything. India had the wherewithal in the previous decade to help crack an important scientific mystery. But if JUNO helps surmount this challenge, India may not have the resources to take a shot at the next big mystery on this front because it will be more specialised and require more sophisticated technologies. Then again, only a fool would bet against the ingenuity and resourcefulness of young scientists to come up with a way.

What grates more is the spectre of “resource constraints” — sometimes all too real, sometimes a bogeyman that administrators invoke to not fund research or, crucially, the skills and materials required to manage its consequences for local communities. Still, there is no room for the notion that India is not ready for a Big Science project. Both the large ground-based telescopes of astronomy and the protected areas of conservation constitute Big Science, and India has many of them. Perhaps the bigger lesson is that we should not attempt such a project solely by whether our scientists alone are ready; we should also check whether the conditions beyond science and on the ground are ready as well.

Published – November 27, 2025 01:37 am IST

China has finished building its Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO), a bittersweet development given that the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) has been in limbo for years. Both JUNO and INO were designed to study subatomic particles called neutrinos, which are very hard to catch because they rarely interact with matter. This is why both INO and JUNO are huge: the more matter there is, the more interactions there will be between neutrinos and matter, and thus more opportunities for study.

Progress on JUNO

However, this size was perhaps the original trigger of the INO’s downfall, so to speak, in India. Because the INO detector was so massive (weighing 50 kilotonnes), it could not be operated from inside a lab nor could scientists situate its detector in an existing facility. Instead, the INO collaboration had planned to install the detector inside a mountain in Theni in Tamil Nadu, together with other research facilities. The mountain’s rock was to serve as a natural shield for the detector, obviating the need for a separate structure, which would have been expensive.

However, the scale of the construction activity in the area and the involvement of the Department of Atomic Energy, which was helping fund the project, spooked the locals and spurred local leaders to draw political mileage from that. The INO collaboration also erred (in hindsight) by not following procedure and by not estimating how controversial the project could become, which, if it had done, would have helped it respond to and manage certain public sentiments better.

In the late 2010s, these delays were painful as China moved in leaps to realise JUNO. The ‘pain’ was because the INO collaboration was hoping to secure a limited pool of grants and investments from foreign governments to operate the detector. China expected to complete JUNO by 2020 but that turned out to be five years too soon. If it had said it would aim for 2025, would the INO have had a better chance by no longer having a tight deadline? Maybe not but it wouldn’t have been implausible either.

Today, while the INO remains stalled, JUNO has released its first analyses. The JUNO team uploaded two preprint papers on November 18. One reported the “initial performance results of the JUNO detector”. Its author list reveals the sort of international collaboration India was hoping for, with researchers from Armenia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Pakistan, Russia, Slovakia, Thailand, the U.K., and the U.S. participating.

It is not clear why there are no researchers from India. Journalist Jatan Mehta has documented a similar issue in the space science sphere: researchers from India were conspicuous by their absence in the (first) list of applications to access the rocks China had brought back from the moon on its Chang’e-5 mission in 2020. India has a long history in neutrino physics and analysing lunar samples, and boasts of many excellent scholars in these fields.

The second preprint paper reported the object of INO’s study. Even though neutrinos are so elusive, physicists have discovered that they come in three types, or flavours, and that they can oscillate between these as they travel through space.

Figuring out how the three neutrino masses are ordered is an important open question — and it is related to neutrino oscillations, which are in turn described by three figures called θ-12 (“theta one two”), θ-13, and θ-23. Previous experiments have pinned down θ-13, and JUNO and INO were conceived to use this prior knowledge to determine the neutrino mass ordering. In the second paper, the JUNO collaboration reported that it had measured θ-12 very precisely, in a way broadly consistent with previous findings.

On the back of this, Institute of High Energy Physics scientist and JUNO project manager and spokesperson Yifang Wang had said, “With this level of accuracy, JUNO will soon determine the neutrino mass ordering, test the three-flavour oscillation framework, and search for new physics beyond it.”

Rising bar

While we can debate the way the INO collaboration (at times), bureaucrats, political leaders, and some activists conducted themselves during the saga, one must acknowledge that in this domain, missing the bus on one occasion does not mean you can catch the next one; it means the next one has to be something more sophisticated than a bus for your efforts to mean anything. India had the wherewithal in the previous decade to help crack an important scientific mystery. But if JUNO helps surmount this challenge, India may not have the resources to take a shot at the next big mystery on this front because it will be more specialised and require more sophisticated technologies. Then again, only a fool would bet against the ingenuity and resourcefulness of young scientists to come up with a way.

What grates more is the spectre of “resource constraints” — sometimes all too real, sometimes a bogeyman that administrators invoke to not fund research or, crucially, the skills and materials required to manage its consequences for local communities. Still, there is no room for the notion that India is not ready for a Big Science project. Both the large ground-based telescopes of astronomy and the protected areas of conservation constitute Big Science, and India has many of them. Perhaps the bigger lesson is that we should not attempt such a project solely by whether our scientists alone are ready; we should also check whether the conditions beyond science and on the ground are ready as well.

Published – November 27, 2025 01:37 am IST

A giant sphere 700 m (2,300 ft) underground with thousands of light-detecting tubes will be sealed in a 12-storey cylindrical pool of water in coming months for an experiment that will shine new light on elusive subatomic particles known as neutrinos.

After years of construction, the $300 million Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) in China’s southern Guangdong province will soon start gathering data on neutrinos, a product of nuclear reactions, to help solve one of the biggest mysteries in particle physics.

Every second, trillions of extremely small neutrinos pass through matter, including the human body. In mid-flight, a neutrino, of which there are three known varieties, could transform into other types. Determining which types are the lightest and the heaviest would offer clues to subatomic processes during the early days of the universe and to explaining why matter is the way it is.

To that end, Chinese physicists and collaborating scientists from all over the world will analyse the data on neutrinos emitted by two nearby Guangdong nuclear power plants for up to six years.

JUNO would also be able to observe neutrinos from the sun, gaining a real-time view of solar processes. It could also study neutrinos given off by the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium in the Earth to better understand mantle convection driving tectonic plates.

Due to go operational in the latter half of 2025, JUNO will outpace the far larger Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) under construction in the United States. DUNE, backed by the Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) under the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) top particle physics laboratory, Fermilab, will come online around 2030.

The race to understand neutrinos and advance the study of particle physics, which has transformed medical imaging technologies and developed new energy sources, intensified when the DOE abruptly cut funding for U.S. institutes collaborating on JUNO. It instead focused on building DUNE, which has since been plagued by delays and budget overruns, with costs skyrocketing to more than $3 billion.

“China had supported Fermilab’s LBNF at the time, but later the cooperation could not continue,” Wang Yifang, chief scientist and project manager of JUNO, told Reuters during a recent government-backed media tour of the facility.

“Around 2018-2019, the U.S. DOE asked all national laboratories not to cooperate with China, so Fermilab was forced to stop working with us.”

The DOE, the largest U.S. funding agency for particle physics, did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment.

Sino-U.S. tensions have risen sharply over the past decade. A trade war erupted during the Trump administration and President Joe Biden later cracked down on the sale of advanced technology to China.

In August, a bilateral science and technology cooperation pact signed in 1979 lapsed, potentially pushing more scientists to seek alternative partners, creating duplication in research and missing out on collaboration that otherwise might have led to beneficial discoveries.

In the 2010s, the countries jointly produced a nuclear reactor that could use low-enriched uranium, minimising the risk of any fuel being weaponised.

China’s foreign ministry said Beijing was “in communication” with Washington about the lapsed science agreement. The U.S. State Department did not comment.

Sole U.S. Collaborator

Institutions collaborating on JUNO hail from locations including France, Germany, Italy, Russia and the U.S., and even self-governed Taiwan, which China claims as part of its territory.

Neutrino observatories are also being constructed in other places.

“The one in the U.S. will be six years behind us. And the one in the France and in Japan, they will be two or three years later than us. So we believe that we can get the result of mass hierarchy (of neutrinos) ahead of everybody,” Wang said.

So far, real-life neutrino applications remain a distant prospect. Some scientists have mulled the possibility of relaying long-distance messages via neutrinos, which pass through solid matter such as the Earth at near light speed.

Researchers are keeping their distance from politics to focus on the science, although they remain at the mercy of governments providing the funding.

One U.S. group remains in JUNO, backed by the National Science Foundation, which recently renewed its funding for its collaboration for another three years, the group’s leading physicist told Reuters.

In contrast, more than a dozen U.S. institutes participated in the predecessor to JUNO, the Daya Bay experiment, also in Guangdong.

“Despite any political differences, I believe that through our collaboration on this scientific endeavour, we are setting a positive example that may contribute, even in a small way, to bringing our countries closer together,” said J. Pedro Ochoa-Ricoux of the University of California, Irvine.

Data integrity

The passage of neutrinos from the two power stations will be logged by JUNO’s 600 metric ton spherical detector, which will immediately transmit the data to Beijing electronically. The data will be simultaneously relayed to Russia, France and Italy, where it can be accessed by all of the collaborating institutions, said Cao Jun, JUNO’s deputy manager.

Data integrity has been a concern among foreign companies in China since a law was enacted in 2021 on the use, storage and transfer of data in the name of safeguarding national security.

“We have a protocol to make sure that no data is missing,” Cao said.

For data on the more crucial aspects of the experiment, at least two independent teams will conduct analyses, with their results cross-checked.

“When these two groups get a consistent result, we can publish it,” Cao said.

U.S.-based Ochoa-Ricoux, who previously collaborated on China’s Daya Bay experiment, will lead the data analysis for JUNO. He will also be involved in the DUNE data analysis.

“We welcome the Americans,” said Wang, also director of the Institute of High Energy Physics, the Chinese counterpart of Fermilab.