Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Neutrinos moving faster than light?

ncjunk

By ncjunk
in Physics, Space Science and Theories

Recommended Posts

ncjunk

ncjunk

Posted
Posted

So if the following is proved correct-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

Could this imply that the speed limit in relativity is not the speed of light but a higher value?

And could light therefore have a slight mass? Would that account for the difference?

I hope this proves to be true, it will be interesting if it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 180
  • Created
  • Last Reply
dmahon

dmahon

Posted
Posted

15,000 measurements. I'd not bet on it being an error.

People used to say we'd never break the speed of sound, the world was flat, the sun revolved around the Earth, etc. Why should we be surprised when we find out that the speed of light is no different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ncjunk

ncjunk

Posted
  • Author
Posted
15,000 measurements. I'd not bet on it being an error.

People used to say we'd never break the speed of sound, the world was flat, the sun revolved around the Earth, etc. Why should we be surprised when we find out that the speed of light is no different?

The number of measurements would be irrelavent if they all suffer from the same fundamental error. But independantly experimentation verifying the results would certainly help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted

My cautionary note from the other thread on this:

There was an interesting blog post from Tommasso Dorigo (physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN) which he then removed - and apparently will repost

http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/blog/new_results_opera_due_tomorrow-82907

My understanding (and memory!) of the removed posting was that the detection timing was very well understood, but maybe the production wasn't and some neutrinos were emitted earlier than thought. So worth watching that for thoughts from an expert - that blog and Résonaances are both excellent sources for current results in particle physics.

Some more in Luboš Motl's blog

http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/09/it...erluminal.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted
But its started a lot of debate everywhere this.

It's bound to, i'd just caution against believing much of what the mainstream media say at this point - the Beeb didn't even manage to get the name of the experiment right at first. From personal experience i'd say the press aren't very good at interpreting things like this.

I'd hang on until the results drop out from embargo tomorrow - which is why I assume Dorigo had to remove them, as he's funded the same way as the experiment - and see what the experts say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted
15,000 measurements. I'd not bet on it being an error.

People used to say we'd never break the speed of sound, the world was flat, the sun revolved around the Earth, etc. Why should we be surprised when we find out that the speed of light is no different?

...well, nobody sensible ever said the Earth was flat. It's an historical myth.

The difference with the speed of light as an absolute is that it is based upon fundamental principle.

Sadly I think this will probably be systematic error but I do think we need a better theory of time.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JB80

JB80

Posted
Posted

I hope this is not an error. I came on to make a thread on this but you guys are all over it already.

So lets say it's real. What will it mean?

A complete overhaul and start from scratch or just a slight adaptation to what we already theorise? Let's face it, we know we don't have a complete understanding so I see no reason why it's not plausible unless you use Einsteinien physics which to be fair would have just been thrown out of the window. Fundamental principle may no longer be fundamental.

That's my question I guess, IF true are the implications as big as I suspect they may be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted
A complete overhaul and start from scratch or just a slight adaptation to what we already theorise?

Pretty much breaks relativity, I think - as a Physicist i'd LOVE to live in times when everything changes (cf. the early 20th century with relativity and quantum physics) and i'm always rather baffled when people make claims that the "professionals" want to maintain the scientific orthodoxy, in general it's the reverse, but the standard for proof is pretty high in this respect. Personally I share Phil Plait's disclaimer entirely

However, the devil's in the details, and this isn't my field, so I'll be very curious to see how the pros in this discipline react to the paper.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ben Ritchie

Ben Ritchie

Posted
Posted

Regarding the "six sigma" nature of the effect, this is always a topic of debate - either it's a real event standing far outside the random noise level, or it's a sign of systematic effects outside your statistics. For example, on the 6th of september the Swiss frank underwent a "20 sigma" event

FT Alphaville A Swiss “sigma” event

If the price movements were independent and Gaussian a 20 sigma event would simply never happen. In reality the explanation is simple, the Swiss central bank pegged rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turbotim

turbotim

Posted
Posted

I have a couple of questions , now that we can travel faster then the speed of light, I will build a vehicle, pod, or a spaceship that can go faster than the speed of light. So what would happen if i pointed it towards empty space and blasted off, if i go faster than the speed of light, would i disappear? Would i get to my destination before i left. Does this now mean its safe to go into a black hole what are the implications? Does this mean teleportation is possible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JulianO

JulianO

Posted
Posted
I have a couple of questions , now that we can travel faster then the speed of light, I will build a vehicle, pod, or a spaceship that can go faster than the speed of light.

You'd struggle to build anything out of neutrinos, they don't make for good building materials!

So what would happen if i pointed it towards empty space and blasted off, if i go faster than the speed of light, would i disappear?

I guess so - if the acceleration didn't squish you. However without invoking relativity, as this is all new anyway, I guess after you'd gone a meter, the light from this would come towards us, and we'd see you there, but not when we'd expect to see you.

Would i get to my destination before i left. Does this now mean its safe to go into a black hole what are the implications? Does this mean teleportation is possible?

You wouldn't get to your destination before you left. Say you went to the sun, which is 8 light minutes away, and went so faster than light, you might get there in 7 minutes. So you'd be there 7 minutes after you left. However from earth we'd see you arrive a minute before you should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stagman

Stagman

Posted
Posted

You wouldn't get to your destination before you left. Say you went to the sun' date=' which is 8 light minutes away, and went so faster than light, you might get there in 7 minutes. So you'd be there 7 minutes after you left. However from earth we'd see you arrive a minute before you should.[/quote']

I would have thought that for him he would arrive at the Sun instantly and that we would see him arrive 8 minutes later?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.