Faster Than Light neutrinos just *can't* exist... can they?

[qubit]

Faster-than-light neutrinos can't catch a break. If they exist they would not only flout special relativity but also the fundamental tenet that energy is conserved in the universe. This suggests that either the speedy neutrino claim is wrong or that new physics is needed to account for it.

In September, physicists with the OPERA experiment in Gran Sasso, Italy, reported that neutrinos had apparently travelled there from CERN near Geneva, Switzerland, faster than light.

The claim threatened to blow a hole in modern physics – chiefly Einstein's special theory of relativity, which set the speed of light as the absolute limit for all particles in the universe.

Now a team including Shmuel Nussinov of Tel Aviv University in Israel says it could also put a dent in the principle of the conservation of energy. "This is such a holy principle that has been verified in so many ways," he says.

I think they should build another OPERA style lab several times the distance from CERN, where the difference will be more pronounced and it will be easier to tell if it's just measurement error or the real thing. Of course, in today's age of austerity...

New Scientist

 

[Deleted member 3]

Indeed, because they're cheap to build anyway.

 

[twicksisted]

Indeed, because they're cheap to build anyway.

you could probably build a few for your average FED bailout

 

[Drone]

IMO neutrinos arrived FTL, they didn't move FTL. They just used a shortcut from extra dimension. I believe neutrinos like gravity can "permeate" all dimensions

 

[magibeg]

I personally hope that they do indeed travel faster than light. Nothing is gained by confirming prior knowledge.

 

[NinkobEi]

I'm fairly convinced that all of today's well-regarded "theories" will eventually be debunked. If the law of conservation of mass can be broken, why not conservation of energy?

Have they ever said by how much the neutrino's beat the speed of light? Was it by a significant margin? or like .00003%?

edit: how long is 62 billionths of a second over a distance of 450 miles traveling the speed of light? edit: .0024156923374239 seconds - 62nanoseconds. Pretty sure thats less than .001% but someone confirm LOL

 

[GSquadron]

If same people made einstein famous and if same people found neutrino speed
than same people gonna judge so don't even try to be a hero with just a word
like you all know what it is all. They "always" gonna judge who will be the hero
They didn't ask anyone about einstein's theory and look now!
It is in the middle of nowhere
Even De Brojle opposed Plank, Maxwell and Einstein about the electromagnetic
nature of light so don't think Einstein was a genius, if there was none who was
going to oppose him

Also, just for curiosity i found that there was something faster than light when i was 18 year old
So i am 100% sure that einstein was like a puppet for them and a hero for you!

#qubit
I don't really think there is needed a laboratory to prove it when you can prove it by math

 

[Drone]

I'm fairly convinced that all of today's well-regarded "theories" will eventually be debunked. If the law of conservation of mass can be broken, why not conservation of energy?

All the laws will be broken if supersymmetry (string theory or a grand unified field theory) is right. It says that there's a symmetry relating the known fermions to hypothetical bosons and the known bosons to hypothetical fermions. In that case everything we ever know about matter, energy, time and space is incomplete and wrong (in the worst case). Atm it's crystal clear that everything is more complicated than we - the people - thought.

http://www.supersymmetry.com/

 

[NinkobEi]

After some fuzzy math, Neutrino's traveled .00024% faster than the speed of light assuming the measurements were true. Doesn't seem very significant to me. When something hits 110% SoL give me a call.

String theory seems a little too fantastic to me to be true. Sure there are some math equations to back it up, but some of the variables (see: extra dimensions) used are just completely made up and a figment of someone's imagination.

 

[qubit]

After some fuzzy math, Neutrino's traveled .00024% faster than the speed of light assuming the measurements were true. Doesn't seem very significant to me. When something hits 110% SoL give me a call.

That's kinda how I feel, it's so tiny that it's just measurement error. That's why I said about making another OPERA facility much further away to try and reduce the error and see if the discrepancy goes away.

It's expensive, but yeah, all research at this level, is.

 

[arnoo1]

They prove that neutrino's are faster, they tested it 2 times, apparently they are faster xd

 

[Steevo]

To calculate that they had to use high precision timing, and how precise was that timing? The time it would take a pulse to travel through wire and be processed, even a miniscule difference in wire length, processing time. They might use GPS but GPS has atmospheric errors even with correction. Fiber optic? unless it was laid in the same path the neutrinos took it would take longer to arrive as the path is longer, plus processing time.

 

[JustaTinkerer]

They prove that neutrino's are faster, they tested it 2 times, apparently they are faster xd

Tested it "with more accuracy" the second time....still think its wrong so spend a few billion to prove it right/wrong...

String theory is looking more and more likely

 

[twilyth]

After some fuzzy math, Neutrino's traveled .00024% faster than the speed of light assuming the measurements were true.

From our point of view it doesn't seem like a big deal, but faster is faster and that throws a wrench into relativity. Well, not technically since it only states you can't travel at the speed of light, but still, transluminal speeds are still a big deal since it appears to violate everything we thought we knew.

Also, as to experimental error, if any group of people on the face of the planet know about experimental error, it's these guys (and ladies).

 

[The_Ish]

So what if they can? What implications would it have?

 

[qubit]

So what if they can? What implications would it have?

It would bust quite a few laws of physics, that's what. Have a read of the OP and the rest of the thread to get a better idea of this.

 

[Completely Bonkers]

I don't see the problem.

Has the equation E=mc2 been challenged? No. Holds.

Is it possible to say that in Earth's gravitational field where g bends the space time continuum that a neutrino can get from A to B faster than light (of a specific wavelength)? Yes. But did we also send light down the same track and compare? No. Oohps.

Do we now have a better estimate of "c"? Could be.

What did we actually observe?

Is t (time) continuous and synchronous for all experiments in g?

Is the sun and Earth's spin causing additional accelerations other than g that might impact t*?

Did the neutrino take a shortcut? It's uncertainly possible.

Could it be that nothing travels faster than c, but light is fast, and so close to c, we assume it is c, and in all experiments it is so close we equate it... but actually, a neutrino is faster than light<neutrino<c ?

 

[Frick]

I don't see the problem.

Has the equation E=mc2 been challenged? No. Holds.

Is it possible to say that in Earth's gravitational field where g bends the space time continuum that a neutrino can get from A to B faster than light (of a specific wavelength)? Yes. But did we also send light down the same track and compare? No. Oohps.

Do we now have a better estimate of "c"? Could be.

What did we actually observe?

Is t (time) continuous and synchronous for all experiments in g?

Is the sun and Earth's spin causing additional accelerations other than g that might impact t*?

Did the neutrino take a shortcut? It's uncertainly possible.

Could it be that nothing travels faster than c, but light isn't actually c, just very close indeed?

Gee, you should write a mail to them, I guess they never thought about that.

I'm sorry about that, was a bit sarcastic, but I just find these discussions funny.

 

[Completely Bonkers]

I'm an 80-20 Pareto advocate. Relativity is irrelevant to our lives. Throw it out with the bathwater. Let's start discussing OC'ing and bios haxxing. That has PRACTICAL benefits.

 

[Drone]

Could it be that nothing travels faster than c, but light is fast, and so close to c, we assume it is c, and in all experiments it is so close we equate it

Light doesn't always travel at c speed.

The fastest part of a single photon, the precursor wave front always travels at the speed of light in vacuum. The main wave packet of the single photon travels no faster than the speed of light in vacuum in any dispersive medium, and can be delayed up to 500 nanoseconds in a slow light medium. Even in a superluminal medium where the group velocity (of an optical pulse peak) is faster than the speed of light in vacuum, the main part of the single photon has no possibility to travel faster than its precursor.

In a nutshell: Single Photons Do Not Exceed the Speed of Light

According to special relativity c is the speed at which electromagnetic radiation propagates (not only light).

 

[TheMailMan78]

Two "confirmed" theories were possibly debunked last year "Speed of light" and "Consistent decay" both of which are corner stones to physics. Even if Einstein relativity theory is wrong this just proves to me quantum physics is still way to young and hard to prove to be taken at face value.

Sorry but I'm still in the Einstein camp.

 

[qubit]

Consistent decay

What do you mean by this? I'd like to look it up.

I reckon that both Einstein and quantum mechanics are right, but that we're only seeing part of a much larger picture.

 

[NinkobEi]

I wonder if Quantum theory can be applied to predicting human behavior? I like to imagine each subatomic particle as a little life form that decides what to do for himself. Impossible to predict the actions of 1 particle but very accurately predicting many particles is possible.

 

[TheMailMan78]

What do you mean by this? I'd like to look it up.

I reckon that both Einstein and quantum mechanics are right, but that we're only seeing part of a much larger picture.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149245

I wonder if Quantum theory can be applied to predicting human behavior? I like to imagine each subatomic particle as a little life form that decides what to do for himself. Impossible to predict the actions of 1 particle but very accurately predicting many particles is possible.

Why not? They say photosynthesis is quantum mechantics at work in the known world because they don't know how it works. A lot of this reminds my of the Aliens guy. "We dunno how it works. There for it must me quantum mechanics."

Indeed, because they're cheap to build anyway.

Im working on one now. It consists of coke cans, distilled water, and a polyurethane marital aid.

 

[scoutingwraith]

About the theories. In science there is nothing solid that holds forever. We just make an observed scientific fact and then build up from there because we do not know when something has "begun" or "ended" (in a metaphorical sense)

Which reminds me. Was not there an experiment where they sent neutrinos over a 400 Mph distance and they arrived faster than the given FTL speed. I think they recorded it and used error correction to see if they were wrong. Apparently they were not. (sorry guys cant remember the article i read it from)