Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern

[heky]

no. nothing can exceed the speed of light.

Isnt your statement exactly the opposite of what the article says?

 

[W1zzard]

Isnt your statement exactly the opposite of what the article says?

yes, which is why the scientists who wrote the article said "this can't be right. help us find our error"

 

[de.das.dude]

you cant beat the speed of light. if you do we all die

 

[HossHuge]

And what's the purpose of this?

If true, it would be comparable to finding out the world was not flat or the Earth was not the centre of the galaxy. In short, any theroy that uses the speed of light could not be true.

 

[Drone]

you cant beat the speed of light. if you do we all die

Does this tell you anything?

In a superluminal medium the group velocity of an optical pulse peak is faster than the speed of light in vacuum

 

[Derek12]

The speed of light was surpassed in some cases.

 

[Captain.Abrecan]

Mathematician at work says the speed of light is actually:
E=mc^2 + p^2/2m

to account for harmonic oscillation momentum

 

[Drone]

the speed of light is actually:
E=mc^2 + p^2/2m

That equation is classical energy-momentum relation where p^2/2m is kinetic energy. The speed of light in that formula is a constant

 

[de.das.dude]

Does this tell you anything?

we are all going to DIEEEEEEEEE

 

[TheMailMan78]

This is just nature trolling science again.

no. nothing can exceed the speed of light.

Just like radiation degrades at a constant rate? No matter what? lol

I agree this is just an anomaly. I doubt this thing holds any water. But its definitely worth looking in to ya know?

 

[Steevo]

The earth is in motion at approx 29 m/s

At 730 Km trip with the other detector accelerating at the particles in flight gives me roughly 20ns less time than a standard flight would.
(730 / 299792458) - (730 / (299792458 + 29)) = SUMa (2.35547994 × 10-13)
(730 / 299792458) = SUMb (2.43501789 × 10-6)
Sumb - SUMa = (2.43501766 × 10-6)

A difference of .000000023 seconds. Or 23ns.

Unless my math is wrong, and I am just using google for the math. This does not include the effects of how fast the earth is moving in the galaxy, or in rotation.

 

[TheMailMan78]

The earth is in motion at approx 29 m/s

At 730 Km trip with the other detector accelerating at the particles in flight gives me roughly 20ns less time than a standard flight would.
(730 / 299792458) - (730 / (299792458 + 29)) = SUMa (2.35547994 × 10-13)
(730 / 299792458) = SUMb (2.43501789 × 10-6)
Sumb - SUMa = (2.43501766 × 10-6)

A difference of .000000023 seconds. Or 23ns.

Unless my math is wrong, and I am just using google for the math. This does not include the effects of how fast the earth is moving in the galaxy, or in rotation.

 

[W1zzard]

did anyone watch the webcast?

recording soon: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1384486?ln=en

Mathematician at work says the speed of light is actually:
E=mc^2 + p^2/2m

to account for harmonic oscillation momentum

isnt the speed of light a fundamental constant that is by definition (of meter and second) 299,792,458 m/s ?

Just like radiation degrades at a constant rate? No matter what? lol

are you talking about nuclear decay ? the half life is constant for a given isotope without external factors.

of course you can "change" the halflife, for example by dropping a neutron in there -> bomb, nuclear power

 

[douglatins]

http://io9.com/5843112/faster-than-light-neutrinos-not-so-fast

Cool article

The earth is in motion at approx 29 m/s

At 730 Km trip with the other detector accelerating at the particles in flight gives me roughly 20ns less time than a standard flight would.
(730 / 299792458) - (730 / (299792458 + 29)) = SUMa (2.35547994 × 10-13)
(730 / 299792458) = SUMb (2.43501789 × 10-6)
Sumb - SUMa = (2.43501766 × 10-6)

A difference of .000000023 seconds. Or 23ns.

Unless my math is wrong, and I am just using google for the math. This does not include the effects of how fast the earth is moving in the galaxy, or in rotation.

You cant add speed to light speed, if you shoot a bullet that is going at lightspeed that has a lightsource at its tip, their speed will be equal

 

[W1zzard]

http://io9.com/5843112/faster-than-light-neutrinos-not-so-fast

Cool article

this is just a rewrite of an article from another site (they mentioned supernova 1987a, too).

and i found the paper on arxiv after like 5 minutes (link further up)

 

[Steevo]

http://io9.com/5843112/faster-than-light-neutrinos-not-so-fast

Cool article



You cant add speed to light speed, if you shoot a bullet that is going at lightspeed that has a lightsource at its tip, their speed will be equal

Bullet is flying at 100MPH
The target is moving at the bullet at 50MPH.

They are 150 miles apart at the beginning of the experiment. We aren't adding speed to the projective as much as subtracting the distance traveled by the target.


Once the space shuttle took off and reached a certain speed it appeared to be arcing in the sky, in reality the earth was turning under it, if the same physical properties apply but on a much larger scale to a set of particles at lightspeed it would explain the effect they saw here possibly.

That or much like entanglement the propagation of the particles arrival travels ahead of them causing things to become or be ready for their arrival.

 

[Horrux]

A lot of theories are based on the fastest thing possible being the speed of light. This has the punch to make all those theories null and void, which is like putting a big cross through peoples LIFE long work.

Well, given that quantum physics has easily demonstrated discontinuous travel, this might be a 'simple' occurrence of that. It travels slower than light but discontinuously, so the 'skips' add up and it looks like it's faster than light. And they're squarely into the realm of quantum physics there, so it could be any number of weird effects. But they're human too, and humans think in classic terms, not quantum.

 

[Fourstaff]

You people need to take a crash course at relativity again. The more I know, the more it hurts my head so I am just going to stick with 5d matrix calculations and leave the rest to Physicists.

 

[Horrux]

Whatever happened to spooky action at a distance (quantum entanglement)?


Also, I know it violates super-symmetry but I like my tachyon beams: scanning something before you ever thought to start scanning it.

. . . Haven't read article yet . . .


Although I'm not who you were replying to, yes.

Rather, traveling back in time. Traveling forward in time is trivial, just get on a plane. If you're not following me then start complaining to your GPS.

Traveling faster than light relative to a certain region of space will make you travel back in time relative to that space. AFAIK . . .

Quantum entanglement isn't really something travelling faster than light. Well, you could send information through it at near-infinite speed, of course, but information isn't matter. So in that sense, even considering quantum entanglement, the c "limit" still applies.

 

[Steevo]

So you are saying that entanglement from a object, one neutrino for example is impossible while it is traveling the speed of light? So other neutrino's from the sun that are going to interact with it in the future in the sensor space would be prevented from being entangled by one of the projectiles since that would require faster than light interactions?

If the neutrinos are sending a entanglement "message" ahead saying I will be there in XX ns, GTFO, or if it is traveling as a wave that propagates at speed.....

 

[Horrux]

So you are saying that entanglement from a object, one neutrino for example is impossible while it is traveling the speed of light? So other neutrino's from the sun that are going to interact with it in the future in the sensor space would be prevented from being entangled by one of the projectiles since that would require faster than light interactions?

Are you talking to me? If so, that's not what I mean.

I mean that in the case of quantum entangled particles, you can separate these particles by large distances (say, some light-years) and use the entangled particles for binary data transmissions which would be instantaneous, resulting in apparent speeds approaching the infinite for the information passed from one particle to the next. However, information is not particles, so even though the information "traveled" much faster than light, the speed of light limit still holds because it applies to matter. Or energy, which is the same stuff.

 

[douglatins]

Bullet is flying at 100MPH
The target is moving at the bullet at 50MPH.

They are 150 miles apart at the beginning of the experiment. We aren't adding speed to the projective as much as subtracting the distance traveled by the target.


Once the space shuttle took off and reached a certain speed it appeared to be arcing in the sky, in reality the earth was turning under it, if the same physical properties apply but on a much larger scale to a set of particles at lightspeed it would explain the effect they saw here possibly.

That or much like entanglement the propagation of the particles arrival travels ahead of them causing things to become or be ready for their arrival.

Yes i agree, but what he was saying is that we should have added the speed of the earth. But then by your logic the source of the beam is also moving the same, so the earths speed on whatever sys doenst matter

 

[W1zzard]

and use the entangled particles for binary data transmissions

you can't use entangled particles for ftl information transfer

let me give an example that serves to illustrate the problem (yes i know it's not perfect):
i have 2 magical boxes with a marble inside each. the marble can be black or white. since the boxes are entangled the marbles inside will always be the same color. you take your box and move away. i open my box and see a black marble -> so _i_ know you have a black marble. if you open your box you see a black marble too, but no information was actually transferred. if you open your box before i do, you see either a black or white marble, and know i will get that color when i open my box. but i dont gain any knowledge from that -> no information transferred

 

[Benetanegia]

I'm pretty sure that our perceived universe/dimensions is/are only a part of the real universe, and only a subset of all the physics laws applies. As an analogy, we live in the surface of an sphere and for us the only x, y and z values that can exist are those that make sense within the sphere -> x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = r^2.

But probably we are not even able to grasp the concept of x, y and z cartessian coordinates since we have measured our world in the polar coordinates of radius and angles (theta and phi).

So light speed might very well be the limit in our subset of the universe, kind of like how only certain values of x, y and z are valid within the surface of the sphere (always =< r). Neutrinos may oscilate not only in the dimensions that we can perceive, but also in one that we don't, its then when it travels faster than light.

I think my example fits kinda well, since we talk about and perceive time and 3 dimensions of space (analogues to r, theta and phi in my example) as separate entities altogether even though relativity very clearly estates that spacetime is a continuum.

 

[W1zzard]

So light speed might very well be the limit in our subset of the universe

yes, thats the definition of universal law of nature.

nothing prohibits other universes to exist with different physics, but this isnt relevant for our science because per definition we can not test anything outside our universe, hence it is not science but religion, philosophy, <random other term>

if you claim the speed of light (in vacuum) is not constant throughout the universe then that contradicts many observations like cosmic microwave background etc.