• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!

Roll over Einstein: Pillar of physics challenged

Neutrinos traveling faster than light?

  • Sure.

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • Bull****!

    Votes: 4 44.4%

  • Total voters
    9

Curt James

Elite Member
Elite Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
14,747
Reaction score
4,238
Points
0
Location
Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA
Roll over Einstein: Pillar of physics challenged

By Frank Jordans and Seth Borenstein

September 22, 2011

GENEVA (AP) - A pillar of physics - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - appears to be smashed by an oddball subatomic particle that has apparently made a giant end run around Albert Einstein's theories.

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab said Thursday they have clocked neutrinos traveling faster than light. That's something that according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity - the famous E (equals) mc2 equation - just doesn't happen.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research.

The organization, known as CERN, hosted part of the experiment, which is unrelated to the massive $10 billion Large Hadron Collider also located at the site.

Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the*measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

"They are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they've done and really scrutinize it in great detail, and ideally for someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements," he said Thursday.

Scientists at the competing Fermilab in Chicago have promised to start such work immediately.

"It's a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva. "It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true."

The Chicago team had similar faster-than-light results in 2007, but those came with a giant margin of error that undercut its scientific significance.

Other outside scientists expressed skepticism at CERN's claim that the neutrinos - one of the strangest well-known particles in physics - were observed smashing past the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792 kilometers per second).

University of Maryland physics department chairman Drew Baden called it "a flying carpet," something that was too fantastic to be believable.

CERN says a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light.

Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant. But given the enormous implications of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there was no flaws in the experiment.

"We have not found any instrumental effect that could explain the result of the measurement," said Antonio Ereditato, a physicist at the University of Bern, Switzerland, who was involved in the experiment known as OPERA.

The researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.

A similar neutrino experiment at Fermilab near Chicago would be capable of running the tests, said Stavros Katsanevas, the deputy director of France's National Institute for Nuclear and Particle Physics Research. The institute collaborated with Italy's Gran Sasso National Laboratory for the experiment at CERN.

Katsanevas said help could also come from the T2K experiment in Japan, though that is currently on hold after the country's devastating March 11 earthquake and tsunami.

Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of nature.

Einstein's special relativity theory that says energy equals mass times the speed of light squared underlies "pretty much everything in modern physics," said John Ellis, a theoretical physicist at CERN who was not involved in the experiment. "It has worked perfectly up until now."

He cautioned that the neutrino researchers would have to explain why similar results weren't detected before.

"This would be such a sensational discovery if it were true that one has to treat it extremely carefully," said Ellis.

From The Associated Press
 
I never understood the constraints we put ourselves under with the scientific laws we come up with. Just because we haven't ever seen something doesn't mean it's not possible.
 
I never understood the constraints we put ourselves under with the scientific laws we come up with. Just because we haven't ever seen something doesn't mean it's not possible.

Creating these limitations acts as springboard for exploring ideas, no?
 
since the mass of an object increases as it nears light speed then the neutrinos have no mass which would make sense. i'm guessing these are not your normal sub-atomic particles, I wonder how they are made.
 
since the mass of an object increases as it nears light speed then the neutrinos have no mass which would make sense. i'm guessing these are not your normal sub-atomic particles, I wonder how they are made.

They have mass.
 
:coffee:
 
They have mass.

I had to look up non zero mass since I haven't taken calculus or physics in almost 10 years, but from what I gather, the only reason the term nonzero mass is even used is because our mathematical systems do not allow us to have 0 in the denominator of a fraction.

Am I wrong to say that the neutrinos can't be defined as having mass or not having mass, because the expression is undefined?
 
Solar, atmospheric, and reactor experiments have all conclusively shown that neutrinos possess a small, yet finite, mass. Limits from previous experiments place the neutrino mass at less than 2 eV, while limits from oscillitory experiments place a lower bound of 50 meV on the neutrino mass. The effects of neutrino mass within this scale (50-2000 eV) will have a direct impact on galaxy evolution and cosmology.
MIT's Neutrino and Dark Matter Group

In 2001, analysis of data from SNO, supported by other experiments, confirmed that the sun does indeed produce the predicted number of electron neutrinos and that these do indeed transform themselves into muon and tau neutrinos before they reach detectors on Earth.

Berkeley Lab scientists and engineers designed and constructed the geodesic support structure for SNO???s array of 10,000 photomultiplier tubes. (Photo by Roy Kaltschmidt)
Our ignorance instantly multiplied. Gone was the Standard Model???s massless neutrino traveling at the speed of light. In order to exchange identities, neutrinos have to have mass, if only a little, with a different mass for each flavor. But how much do neutrinos weigh? Which flavor is the heaviest?
Berkeley Lab: Year of Science: Nature

I don't know much about it but I believe anything in motion has mass and anything said to be massless refers only to 'rest mass'. Not that neutrinos have zero rest mass.
 
scientific theories stand on their own until it's knocked down. They never claim to be absolutely correct, that is the dogma for religion. If the set of principles that explain observations verified by numerous experiments is challenged by a new set of observations and experiments, then, that is healthy for the scientific community.

i'm not a physicist but my question is how do we know there isn't an error in the measurement of the speed? The margin, while significant, is still awfully close in my mind to "human error" ( In my field, that is how a lot of false negatives or positives , how we "measure" the variable).

I'm just a dumb lab jockey in this field of physics, these extreme precision in time and distance measurements - at a 60 nanosecond differential, the innate electronic errors probably become significant although it looks like cern performed the experiment 15,000 times before reporting results. I never had to deal with such precision when I was just blowing up stuff in the lab as chemist.
 
Last edited:
I'm no physicist but I know enough quantum to look like an educated idiot.

Neutrinos are quantum particles, right? The "no faster than light proposition" .....isn't that only applicable directly to particles whose trajectory, in the classical sense, is well defined And quantum particles don't follow classical behavior. To me this experiment seems to show that neutrinos have a defined trajectory, which now seems at odd with QM, in my mind, but I may be misinterpreting. I think that the result, as stated in the media, is inconclusive because quantum effects would make impossible to detect such small deviations from c because the entire notion of trajectory is ill defined...therefore, I think it may shake up QED more than SR and GR

. a real physicist may interject and straighten me out any time.......
 
Last edited:
Scientific theories stand on their own until it's knocked down. They never claim to be absolutely correct, that is the dogma for religion. If the set of principles that explain observations verified by numerous experiments is challenged by a new set of observations and experiments, then, that is healthy for the scientific community.

:winkfinger:
 
just an update provided to me by my physicist brother


Critics take aim at fast neutrinos
Lack of energy trail suggests finding was miscalculated
By Devin Powell
November 5th, 2011; Vol.180 #10 (p. 10)

A new study puts the brakes on faster-than-light neutrinos.

In September, a group at Italy’s OPERA experiment reportedly clocked neutrinos traveling the 730 kilometers from CERN in Switzerland to Italy’s underground Gran Sasso National Laboratory about 60 nanoseconds faster than light would have covered that distance in a vacuum (SN: 10/22/11, p. 18). But if this were true, most of the neutrinos would have shed energy en route, a new analysis by Boston University physicists suggests.

<snip>

“We’re pretty much convinced that the experiment is wrong,” says Glashow. “But I don’t think anyone has identified the error, if there is an error, as of yet.”
 
Pretty much all of this went over my head.

But I do have one question:

When is my time machine gonna be ready???:p
 
This makes sense to me, neutrinos can pass through matter so there is not much out there to impede it or drag it down therefore seeming to travel faster than we think light travels, but light can be impeded and we might not have its vacuum speed correct(we would have to measure it in a perfect vacuum).

How about that guy who says they are jumping dimensions and that's why they are seemingly faster....


Is dark faster than light? I always wondered that....
 
darkness is the absence/lack of visible light

It must be the presence of something unless we are outside the edge of the universe, though there is the school of thought that even out there there is something....

When I was a little kid though when the lights were turned out I'd think about the Nothing in NeverEnding Story and wonder if the Nothing could move faster than light, and if thats what Einstein meant by Nothing is faster than light. I was grounded a lot and my dad made me read the Encyclopedias or books for punishment, plus we only had one tv for years and he watched Star Trek, Nova, Doctor Who and the like all the time, he would sit on Sundays with the tv guide and program the VCR to record these shows if they played while he wasn't home. It's too bad he died before you could get terabyte dvrs....

For a 9th grade dropout he was pretty damned smart, my mom is the same they both dropped out in 9th grade, yet you would never know
 
Intresting. Never heard of a nutrino in all of my chem classes. Still pretty cool.
 
Back
Top