EPTCERN finds neutrinos faster than light - Page 21
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
night terrors
China1284 Posts
| ||
|
night terrors
China1284 Posts
On September 23 2011 17:59 hegeo wrote: Reading the paper it's so interesting to see how they are practically begging for someone to find an error ;-) In the end, this is really good scientific behaviour. Nevertheless, it will be nice to see what the error is (assuming there is one). The difference of 60ns equals 18m roughly (if my quick math is correct here), so false measurements of distance shouldn't be the reason. And their level of statistical significance is 6 sigma, meaning it is like what, 99,999999999998% sure? They surely already spent hundreds of hours recalculating and remeasuring everything. Poor guys ;-) But the valid question still remains: Why do supernova-neutrinos then don't hit us way before photons? I'm too lazy to do the math now, but somebody here said it must be a time difference of years (even if they have negative mass and are "heavier" than the CERN neutrinos, the difference should add up after billions of lightyears). Just wait for all that cooky stuff we couldnt make sense of before taking shape if this is true. | ||
|
PepperoniPiZZa
Sierra Leone1660 Posts
On September 23 2011 17:59 hegeo wrote: Reading the paper it's so interesting to see how they are practically begging for someone to find an error ;-) In the end, this is really good scientific behaviour. Nevertheless, it will be nice to see what the error is (assuming there is one). The difference of 60ns equals 18m roughly (if my quick math is correct here), so false measurements of distance shouldn't be the reason. And their level of statistical significance is 6 sigma, meaning it is like what, 99,999999999998% sure? They surely already spent hundreds of hours recalculating and remeasuring everything. Poor guys ;-) But the valid question still remains: Why do supernova-neutrinos then don't hit us way before photons? I'm too lazy to do the math now, but somebody here said it must be a time difference of years (even if they have negative mass and are "heavier" than the CERN neutrinos, the difference should add up after billions of lightyears). Maybe they die on their way to us? Can we actually distinguish supernova neutrinos from the ones send out by the sun? | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
On September 23 2011 18:15 PepperoniPiZZa wrote: Maybe they die on their way to us? Can we actually distinguish supernova neutrinos from the ones send out by the sun? Yes, we can distinguish between the two. Neutrinos come in 3 different flavours (electron-, muon- and tau-neutrino) and a remarkable property is that neutrinos oscillate between flavours. This oscillation has a known frequency, so we know what flavour-mixture we can expect from the sun, since we know the distance between the sun and our point of measurement. The flavour-mixture from supernova neutrinos will be different. | ||
|
Vorenius
Denmark1979 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/w9NMN.png) I'm with xkcd on this one. People should at least wait a bit before getting too excited about anything. Let other researcher go through the results and try to do their own experiments. 9 out of 10 times it's a mistake with equipment, presumptions, calculations, etc. | ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
 | ||
|
Khul Sadukar
Australia1735 Posts
| ||
|
stafu
Australia1196 Posts
| ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
On September 23 2011 18:32 stafu wrote: Could it be possible to send bytes of neutrinos for faster than light data transmission? That is probably not realistic, because you can't really control neutrinos since they don't interact much with other particles and they are created for example if 2 particles collide. So you would need your own particle accelerator to create a signal =) | ||
|
Truedot
444 Posts
trolls. | ||
|
Toxi78
966 Posts
On September 23 2011 08:19 Asymmetric wrote: What do you mean. A physical wave is simply pressure differences between molecules. It cannot exceed c. Even photons (light) as a massless electromagentic wave cannot exceed c, atleast for the purposes of transmitting information. yes information cannot go faster than c, but the phase velocity can be over c. i know exactly what this all means, i was answering to his "oh so smart" "thought can traval instantly from one place to another" with a physical example of something just as immaterial that can be "faster than c". | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
c=300.000 vs neutrino=300.007,4 | ||
|
Maenander
Germany4926 Posts
On September 23 2011 17:59 hegeo wrote: Reading the paper it's so interesting to see how they are practically begging for someone to find an error ;-) In the end, this is really good scientific behaviour. Nevertheless, it will be nice to see what the error is (assuming there is one). The difference of 60ns equals 18m roughly (if my quick math is correct here), so false measurements of distance shouldn't be the reason. And their level of statistical significance is 6 sigma, meaning it is like what, 99,999999999998% sure? They surely already spent hundreds of hours recalculating and remeasuring everything. Poor guys ;-) But the valid question still remains: Why do supernova-neutrinos then don't hit us way before photons? I'm too lazy to do the math now, but somebody here said it must be a time difference of years (even if they have negative mass and are "heavier" than the CERN neutrinos, the difference should add up after billions of lightyears). Well it was hypothesized even before this experiment that such an effect could strongly depend on the energy of the neutrino. The neutrinos that came from the supernova had energies of several MeV, while the ones from this experiment have energies in the range of several dozen GeV. They tried to measure the effect as a function of the energy in their sample, but the data are not yet of sufficient quality to come to any conclusions in this regard. | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
| ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
On September 23 2011 19:35 sleepingdog wrote: bronze-league question - why don't they just re-do the experiment and see what happens? or is the whole set-up too costly/time-intensive to just go for it a 2nd time? They did 15'000 measurements ^^ You could rebuilt the experiment elsewhere to be totally sure about it, but thats very costly ^^ | ||
|
Tachyon
Denmark146 Posts
 -Physics student | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On September 23 2011 19:43 Tachyon wrote: It's sad when people who know nothing about physics post in these threads.. -Physics student Take 5 minutes and think about how I feel when people around here discuss the economic situation and law-making. You guys in natural sciences are very privileged, since most people accept their limitied knowledge in these subjects  -Master in Law/ Bachelor in Economics | ||
|
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
On September 23 2011 19:43 Tachyon wrote: It's sad when people who know nothing about physics post in these threads...There are theoretical particles that ALWAYS move faster than light called Tachyons (lolMYNAME), and they're perfectly consistent with the general theory of relativity. So don't say nothing moves faster than light. The particles in question are neutrinos, which may or may not have mass, we don't know yet. We actually know very little about them, mainly because their interaction with other particles is so weak. If these neutrinos moved faster than light (which the 60 ns faster than light from CERN tp Gran Sasso +- 10 ns suggests), then it's not neccesarily a break with relativity if it turns out neutrinos do indeed not interact with the Higgs field at all. But we still can't explain why a particle can move both faster and slower than light, and that's the main problem with this finding...if it's backed up by other experiments, then we have a lot of work to do, which is great for physicists ofc -Physics student What limits the speed of photons? They don't have mass. | ||
|
Tachyon
Denmark146 Posts
| ||
|
disco
Netherlands1667 Posts
On September 23 2011 19:43 Tachyon wrote: It's sad when people who know nothing about physics post in these threads... Yes it's so sad, especially because this is a starcraft community.. Sigh. | ||
| ||
