Subluminal eV-Scale Neutrino Tails from Core-Collapse Supernovae as Triggers for VEI 6–7 Volcanic Eruptions: A 6/6 Correlation and Beyond-Standard-Model Mechanism

The complete sample of six well-documented core-collapse supernovae (CCSNe) with reliable age and distance estimates within 12,000 light-years over the last 4,200 years shows a temporal correlation with VEI 6.5–7 volcanic eruptions, with delays of 30–100 years. This delay matches subluminal velocities (98–99.9%c) for eV-scale particles, not relativistic propagation. A Gaussian Monte Carlo simulation—propagating all age uncertainties and requiring eruptions after supernovae—yields p(6+) = 5.58 × 10⁻³ (2.5σ) for nine CCSNe in the sample. For higher match thresholds, significance increases: p(7+) = 3.80 × 10⁻⁴ (3.4σ), p(8+) = 3.00 × 10⁻⁵ (4.2σ), and p(9+) < 3 × 10⁻⁶ (> 4.5σ). If this correlation reflects causation, what physical processes could transmit energy from a CCSN to Earth on decadal timescales? We explore whether beyond-Standard-Model physics could, in principle, account for the observed delays and localized heating. A low-energy (eV-scale) neutrino tail from the CCSN—generated via sterile neutrino oscillations, plasmon decay enhanced by a light Z′, or Bremsstrahlung enhanced by an energy-dependent magnetic moment—could meet the required criteria. Coherent neutrino-nucleus scattering would perturb 40K nuclei, temporarily enhancing electron capture (40K + e− →40Ar + νe), amplifying eV triggers into MeV energy release. Random walk transport through the mantle (λ ∼ 10–100 m) would yield ∼ 10⁹–10¹¹ scatters per neutrino and ∼ 10⁴–10⁶ triggered decays per neutrino. Deposited energy (∼ 10¹³–10¹⁷ J) would raise local magma chamber temperatures by ∼ 10–100 K —potentially sufficient to destabilize pressurized chambers and trigger eruptions. If causal, the model would make a falsifiable prediction: a VEI 6.5–7+ eruption and low-energy neutrino signals within 8 months to 13 years of a Betelgeuse supernova (∼ 650 ly). The required BSM parameter space lies near or beyond current experimental bounds and should be regarded as speculative. The statistical correlation stands independently; failure of any specific mechanism would not invalidate the correlation, but would instead imply either non-causality or a different physical process.