EPTCERN finds neutrinos faster than light - Page 34
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
MuTa07
Netherlands71 Posts
| ||
|
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
synapse
China13814 Posts
On September 24 2011 09:06 Rembot wrote: Did you hear this one? "Hey, we don't serve faster-than-light neutrinos here!" said the bartender. A neutrino walks into a bar. That was the joke for tachyons.  | ||
|
Elldar
Sweden287 Posts
You can't send anything into past. Just like you can't send anything into the future. Past is no more, future does not exist yet. There is only the moment. ??? Yes, you can send stuff into the future theoreticallly. Why, you might wonder? Well, when a particle gets close to the speed of light time litteraly stops whilst the time around moves faster than you. Which would let you move into the futurel. Sure you would still age somewhat since you can't achieve speed of light. See, the Lorentz transformations. Where C is the speed of light. What actually cause this is the speed differnce of two inertial(non-accelerating) systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation Overall you guys have to considered that this is not verified discovery and the publishers did not try to understand the physics behind it. It could still be a weird property in the muon that caused it. However if this discovery is true, it will not shatter relativity, many physical phenomena that can not be described otherwise would still hold. Like a particels energy when it has speed relative to the speed of light. | ||
|
omisa
United States494 Posts
Anyways, i find this to help clarify the situation regarding the recent news. At least for the mere mortals whom are not quantum physicists. + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
hegeo
Germany194 Posts
| ||
|
Corrosive
Canada3741 Posts
On September 24 2011 17:27 hegeo wrote: You know what is especially funny about these findings? That they merely happened to be a by-product no one expected. Reminds me of the penicillin accident :-) Yeah i can imagine them testing things, looking at the results and going "holy this this is faster than light". pretty funny haha :D | ||
|
Serthius
Samoa226 Posts
![[image loading]](http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/neutrinos.png) | ||
|
omisa
United States494 Posts
On September 24 2011 17:27 hegeo wrote: You know what is especially funny about these findings? That they merely happened to be a by-product no one expected. Reminds me of the penicillin accident :-) Ah yes. What really comes to mind is the Hubble Ultra Deep Field. Astronomers pointed the most powerful telescope in the known universe to a literally black patch of sky... and the rest was history. | ||
|
arbitrageur
Australia1202 Posts
On 22 September 2011, the OPERA Collaboration garnered international attention, both publicly and within the physics community, when they claimed that neutrinos had been observed travelling from CERN in Geneva to the OPERA detector at faster-than-light speed. The particles were measured arriving at the detector 60.7 nanoseconds prior to the time expected if they were travelling at lightspeed, with a margin of error of 10.1 nanoseconds (6.9 statistical, 7.4 systematic), a significance of 6-sigma.[3] In particle physics, the standard baseline for a discovery announcement is 5-sigma significance.[4] OPERA collaboration scientist Antonio Ereditato explained that the OPERA team has "not found any instrumental effect that could explain the result of the measurement."[5] James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN said on 22 September that the scientists 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."[6] Previous experiments have not detected statistically significant faster-than light motion; for instance, in 2007 Fermilab's MINOS collaboration reported results measuring the flight-time of neutrinos yielding a speed exceeding that of light by 1.8 sigma.[7] Those measurements were consistent with neutrinos traveling at lightspeed.[8] Spokespeople for both Fermilab and the T2K experiment confirmed their intentions to test the Opera result in coming months.[2] Fermilab noted in reaction to the OPERA announcement that the detectors for the MINOS project are being upgraded, and new results are not expected until at least 2012.[7] Other previous experiments have contradicted OPERA observations. For instance, photons and neutrinos from SN 1987A were observed to have an agreement in transit time to about 1 part in 450 million, with even this difference being accounted for by light being impeded by the material of the star early in its journey. The OPERA results, in contrast, claimed that neutrinos were observed traveling faster than light by a factor of 1 in 40,000. Had neutrinos from SN 1987A traveled faster than light by such a margin, they would have arrived at Earth 4.2 years before the photons; this was not observed to be the case.[9] | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On September 24 2011 17:12 Elldar wrote: ??? Yes, you can send stuff into the future theoreticallly. Why, you might wonder? Well, when a particle gets close to the speed of light time litteraly stops whilst the time around moves faster than you. Which would let you move into the futurel. Sure you would still age somewhat since you can't achieve speed of light. See, the Lorentz transformations. Where C is the speed of light. What actually cause this is the speed differnce of two inertial(non-accelerating) systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation Overall you guys have to considered that this is not verified discovery and the publishers did not try to understand the physics behind it. It could still be a weird property in the muon that caused it. However if this discovery is true, it will not shatter relativity, many physical phenomena that can not be described otherwise would still hold. Like a particels energy when it has speed relative to the speed of light. I dunno, some book whose title escapes me put it really simply. Four dimensions that you exist in...the three + time all have a combined maximum speed limit (Light). The faster you move in space the slower time goes because of the shared speed limit. It's obviously not exactly like this but it at least explained it in a reasonable manner. Also strong gravitational wells theoretically dilate time as well. Orbiting just outside of the event horizon of a super massive black hole is supposed to cut the time you experience in half...ergo for every second you do this two seconds pass normally. | ||
|
ETisME
12489 Posts
On September 24 2011 16:46 MuTa07 wrote: Correct me if im wrong but wasn't "SERN" an evil organization in Steins Gate that wanted to take over the world, with time machine? you are right, Sern is based upon Cern. some of the stuff in steins gate are actually based on reality, such as the lifter technology etc | ||
|
Sfydjklm
United States9218 Posts
On September 24 2011 17:12 Elldar wrote: ??? Yes, you can send stuff into the future theoreticallly. Why, you might wonder? Well, when a particle gets close to the speed of light time litteraly stops whilst the time around moves faster than you. Which would let you move into the futurel. Sure you would still age somewhat since you can't achieve speed of light. See, the Lorentz transformations. Where C is the speed of light. What actually cause this is the speed differnce of two inertial(non-accelerating) systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation Overall you guys have to considered that this is not verified discovery and the publishers did not try to understand the physics behind it. It could still be a weird property in the muon that caused it. However if this discovery is true, it will not shatter relativity, many physical phenomena that can not be described otherwise would still hold. Like a particels energy when it has speed relative to the speed of light. Correct me if i'm wrong it's not really time travel in a classic sense of the word. It's simply changing the effects of time on certain objects. And as far as i can gather from the twin paradox said message gets into the "future" at a certain affixed timeframe, so in that sense it's in no way more time travel then the delay in a long distance phone call is. In that sense it seems to be more akin to cryogenics where the thing-person traveling FTL enjoys being preserved against time for one goal or anotehr. | ||
|
saritenite
Singapore1680 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
I'll keep my eye on this, thanks for the writeup. | ||
|
rubio91
Italy111 Posts
Correct me if i'm wrong it's not really time travel in a classic sense of the word. It's simply changing the effects of time on certain objects. And as far as i can gather from the twin paradox said message gets into the "future" at a certain affixed timeframe, so in that sense it's in no way more time travel then the delay in a long distance phone call is. In that sense it seems to be more akin to cryogenics where the thing-person traveling FTL enjoys being preserved against time for one goal or anotehr. To figure how "time travel" works with special relativity, just think about the Twin paradox. One twin stays on Earth, the other travel to Alpha Centauri, then comes back. When the latter arrives to Earth he will be younger than his twin. He traveled to his twin's future. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6232 Posts
To travel forwards, all it takes is a difference in the time you experience compared to a reference frame; if time travels slower for you than to everyone else, you've travelled to the future. The twins paradox (^) is a good way to illustrate this. Likewise using Back to the Future as the perennial example, when Marty or whatever his name is goes forwards, what's kind of happening is that about 30 years for the world pass in the space of a few seconds for him, so he seems to have jumped to the future. Going backwards is where things get complicated. In theory, that's all the faster-than-light stuff. | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
On September 24 2011 20:52 rubio91 wrote: To figure how "time travel" works with special relativity, just think about the Twin paradox. One twin stays on Earth, the other travel to Alpha Centauri, then comes back. When the latter arrives to Earth he will be younger than his twin. He traveled to his twin's future. Yes, but you missed the guy's point. Cryogenics would produce the exact same effect (if it worked), if you freeze one twin for 30 years, when he wakes up he'll have "travelled to his twin's future". So the time travel that is theoretically possible is nothing like the ones you might see on TV/movies where a guy steps into a time machine and a few seconds later he steps out into a different time period. | ||
|
Hekisui
195 Posts
Today at the newspaper stand I indeed saw headlines like 'Einstein was wrong', 'world shocking scientific discovery' and all kinds of other headlines. This while everyone in the field is very convinced this is one big blunder. I expect headlines 'CERN scientists make embarrassing blunder' soon. So we have headlines "Einstein wrong" and "Science has it all wrong" but next week "Scientists blunder". Yes, very good PR for physics. This is why normal people don't believe scientists even when they have rock solid consensus and politicians can ignore them. | ||
|
Soleron
United Kingdom1324 Posts
On September 24 2011 18:18 Sfydjklm wrote: Correct me if i'm wrong it's not really time travel in a classic sense of the word. It's simply changing the effects of time on certain objects. And as far as i can gather from the twin paradox said message gets into the "future" at a certain affixed timeframe, so in that sense it's in no way more time travel then the delay in a long distance phone call is. In that sense it seems to be more akin to cryogenics where the thing-person traveling FTL enjoys being preserved against time for one goal or anotehr. This is different, it WOULD be backwards time travel. From some reference points the events "neutrino sent" and "neutrino arrives" would be in the opposite order. So you could send information backwards in time. | ||
| ||
