On September 27 2011 05:15 ChoiBoi wrote: I like how everyone puts this down almost immediately. You know how people reacted when Copernicus said the we're heliocentric? The church put him down. Scientists have been put down since the start of history since they discern change as negative. We should be critical, not skeptical about this.
The church funded him and the issue with his work came 6 decades later when Galileo started making claims without data. The church made very minor edits to Copernicus' works and didn't bother even commenting on a huge swatch of other heliocentric works circulating at the time.
With that in mind the linking factor becomes obvious: skepticism.
thing it it was discouvered earlier in another place but was counted as "misstake" cause it wasnt exact enough CERN is as hell as exact so i think ... this changes just EVERYTHING we think of ...
You guys really need to read the works from Popper and Kuhn maybe you'll learn something about science. Especially the processes and what aspects are important especially during revolutionary periods in science (newtonian to einstein, aristotle to copernicus) especially when it comes to immeasurable claims...(I.E. theories)
On September 26 2011 23:24 Antisocialmunky wrote: The thing is that neutrinos don't interact with matter as they have no charge and are very small. Since most matter is actually empty space, they pass through with no effect. This is unlike photons which are influenced by electromagnetic forces.
Geology would also only slow it down.
Maybe I'm being pedantic but neutrinos do have a very very very small amount of charge, not none at all. Everything else is true though.
To get an idea of just how much space exists inside the atom, watch this from 2:30
On September 26 2011 23:24 Antisocialmunky wrote: The thing is that neutrinos don't interact with matter as they have no charge and are very small. Since most matter is actually empty space, they pass through with no effect. This is unlike photons which are influenced by electromagnetic forces.
Geology would also only slow it down.
Maybe I'm being pedantic but neutrinos do have a very very very small amount of charge, not none at all. Everything else is true though.
Let me try to help both of you guys out, so you might be able to get it right the next time.
Neutrinos have an electric charge of 0 and only carry a weak charge + Show Spoiler +
in QED its called weak hypercharge and relates electric charge and weak isospin
. Therefore neutrinos will only interact via the weak force.
So if you want to understand why it is that neutrinos rarely interact you will have to look into some properties of the weak interaction: its 3 gauge bosons + Show Spoiler +
gauge bosons mediate the forces between their corresponding "charges" and are usually exchanged as a virtual particle. In the weak interaction you have 3 gauge bosons the W^{-}, W^{+} , W^{0} and the "charge" is called weak charge (W interact with the weak isospin)
have a pretty huge mass, so they are really short lived which results in a small range. Also the coupling constant fo the weak interaction pretty small. Those things result into a low cross section for interactions via the weak force.
Also you cant say neutrinos dont interact with matter. They have a mass and therefore surely interact with every matter that takes part in the gravitational interaction. And besides that matter is a really vague term in that statement.
tbh I would not be surprised if something did travel faster than light. any time we humans discover what we think is a limit in our natural world, someone comes along in the future and shatters that with another brilliant discovery. Einstein was a genius no doubt, however so was Aristotle, and many others who ended up having their theories and discoveries proved otherwise by future generations.
I think it is naive to think that we have found a limitation in our universe. Because although science is progressing at a tremendous rate, we will never even get close to knowing the limits of our existence.
On September 27 2011 13:17 BalancedBreakfast wrote: tbh I would not be surprised if something did travel faster than light. any time we humans discover what we think is a limit in our natural world, someone comes along in the future and shatters that with another brilliant discovery. Einstein was a genius no doubt, however so was Aristotle, and many others who ended up having their theories and discoveries proved otherwise by future generations.
I think it is naive to think that we have found a limitation in our universe. Because although science is progressing at a tremendous rate, we will never even get close to knowing the limits of our existence.
That is far to broad and unsupported a statement to make. Unless.... your using this discovering to time travel from the moment the universe ends.
CERN are some of the top scientists in the world I can't believe how many people think they made a simple mistake like earth curvature or judging the distance wrong.
They could have possibly miscalculated the time/distance dilation the particle goes while going around the speed of light would be a much more logical possibility. I guess we will have to wait for another independent study of the matter. Hopefully NIST actually does something state side.
On September 27 2011 13:17 BalancedBreakfast wrote: tbh I would not be surprised if something did travel faster than light. any time we humans discover what we think is a limit in our natural world, someone comes along in the future and shatters that with another brilliant discovery. Einstein was a genius no doubt, however so was Aristotle, and many others who ended up having their theories and discoveries proved otherwise by future generations.
I think it is naive to think that we have found a limitation in our universe. Because although science is progressing at a tremendous rate, we will never even get close to knowing the limits of our existence.
It doesn't really work like that... Although I do like how in the show Futerama they changed the speed of light to go faster.
But anyways the reason why you can't go the speed of light is because as you move through space-time you move through it at some constant unit vector that is split between moving through time and moving around the universe. If your unit vector is all the way towards the speed of light this means that you are going through space so fast you don't actually pass through any amount of time. Aka you don't experience time, a paradox to say the least. woo college physics minor...
My guess is that this will show that there was a 0.0025% error in previous attempts to measure the velocity of light. As an engineer i don't really see why such a small deviation should cause such a hype ;-)
It's significant to six standard deviations.
I'm talking about a minute flaw in previous measurements that lead to the current accepted value of c - not about reproducibility of the cern measurements. But then again, i'm not a theoretical physicist, so it's just a guess...
What are you talking about? "the current[ly] accepted value of c"? c is DEFINED to be EXACTLY 299792458,0000000000000000000000 m/s, just like meters and seconds are defined from this figure. And btw, why are so many people clueless about how science works? You think they'd publish this extremely controversial and groundbreaking data without checking, rechecking, and pulling out their hair rechecking again? Come on, guys.
-Physics student
I feel you're splitting hairs - and unnecessarily calling people clueless. I don't see how "defined" is significantly different than "accepted". It also doesn't really matter imho if the speed of light is slightly bigger or the meter is slightly shorter.
Accepted implies that 'c' was measured and there is a general consensus on 'c'. Defined means that 'c' set as 299792458,0000000000000000000000 m/s. Or rather, we get meters and seconds from the speed of light. It is impossible for it to be anything but 299792458,0000000000000000000000 m/s because the speed of light is the basis of the meter. That's why he brought it up. The meter is defined as the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second, so the speed of light, regardless of how fast it's actually going in another measurement, will always be 2997924580000000000000000000000 m/s. We don't accept that 'c' is 'c'. 'c' will always be 'c' because that's how we define the meter. That's a pretty significant difference between acceptance and definition. Now, whether the meter is slightly shorter/longer, who can say? I haven't looked very deeply into this, and doubt I could puzzle it out anyway, but there is a big difference between "defined" and "accepted".
Also, a lot of very smart people have thought about this for at least a while. I really hate how people just dismiss their claims with whatever reason they think of. You really think CERN and the people running this experiment haven't puzzled over this endlessly? If you're not a theoretical physicist, as you say, and they are, what's your guess worth? Not very much. To say that "[you] don't really see why such a small deviation should cause such a hype ;-)" off a guess...well, it's the idiocy is self-evident, isn't it? You may or may not be right, but that's the equivalent of hitting the jackpot. Right now, no one knows, not even specialists in their field. Guess all you like, but don't dismiss their hard work because of your relatively uneducated guess, or say that there shouldn't be hype.
On September 26 2011 23:24 Antisocialmunky wrote: The thing is that neutrinos don't interact with matter as they have no charge and are very small. Since most matter is actually empty space, they pass through with no effect. This is unlike photons which are influenced by electromagnetic forces.
Geology would also only slow it down.
Maybe I'm being pedantic but neutrinos do have a very very very small amount of charge, not none at all. Everything else is true though.
Let me try to help both of you guys out, so you might be able to get it right the next time.
Neutrinos have an electric charge of 0 and only carry a weak charge + Show Spoiler +
in QED its called weak hypercharge and relates electric charge and weak isospin
. Therefore neutrinos will only interact via the weak force.
So if you want to understand why it is that neutrinos rarely interact you will have to look into some properties of the weak interaction: its 3 gauge bosons + Show Spoiler +
gauge bosons mediate the forces between their corresponding "charges" and are usually exchanged as a virtual particle. In the weak interaction you have 3 gauge bosons the W^{-}, W^{+} , W^{0} and the "charge" is called weak charge (W interact with the weak isospin)
have a pretty huge mass, so they are really short lived which results in a small range. Also the coupling constant fo the weak interaction pretty small. Those things result into a low cross section for interactions via the weak force.
Also you cant say neutrinos dont interact with matter. They have a mass and therefore surely interact with every matter that takes part in the gravitational interaction. And besides that matter is a really vague term in that statement.
More accurate and a better overview. I mistyped some stuff about interacting with matter since I was in a rush but yeah, this is pretty much spot on.
It's been known relativity is a limited theory ever since it came out, how can finally taking a step forward be so easily dismissed as a mistake by some people ? o0
On September 27 2011 13:32 Spinfuser wrote: CERN are some of the top scientists in the world I can't believe how many people think they made a simple mistake like earth curvature or judging the distance wrong.
They could have possibly miscalculated the time/distance dilation the particle goes while going around the speed of light would be a much more logical possibility. I guess we will have to wait for another independent study of the matter. Hopefully NIST actually does something state side.
Why do you ppl bring up that earth curvature bullshit?
Im not saying the gps data and the statistical error they get are right but its obviously no matter of earth curvature as neither neutrinos which just fly through eveything nor the gps which will measure 2 points ( cern , detector in italy) in a frame of reference care about curvature.
On September 27 2011 13:32 Spinfuser wrote: CERN are some of the top scientists in the world I can't believe how many people think they made a simple mistake like earth curvature or judging the distance wrong.
They could have possibly miscalculated the time/distance dilation the particle goes while going around the speed of light would be a much more logical possibility. I guess we will have to wait for another independent study of the matter. Hopefully NIST actually does something state side.
Why do you ppl bring up that earth curvature bullshit?
Im not saying the gps data and the statistical error they get are right but its obviously no matter of earth curvature as neither neutrinos which just fly through eveything nor the gps which will measure 2 points ( cern , detector in italy) in a frame of reference care about curvature.
Uh? I agree did you read my post or were you just agreeing with me forcefully?
Not going to read all 38 pages to make sure this isn't a dupe, but here are some facts about the experiment:
* The distance measured is correct. They know the distance to within 20 cm. They didn't screw this part up. * What remains is the time. Now, this part is a bit tricky, because you can't know exactly when a neutrino was created. You can know when it hits the sensor. What you can do is match up the energy of the accelerator (which will, with a certain probability, create neutrinos) with the arriving neutrinos. You can see this clearly in Page 17 of their paper.
Bottom line is, to anyone applying the Standard Model, something is wrong.
I think they are going to try and reproduce the MINOS Fermilab experiments with better equipment as well since it had similar finding but within margin of error.
On September 28 2011 06:39 mmp wrote: Couldn't they repeat the study over a different range. If it's actually a speedup then it should be pronounced over a larger distance.
A neutrino detector is a ridiculously large piece of equipment, and the accelerator is like 7km long. To change the source-detector distance, you basically have to build a whole new facility, at least for the detector. Fermilab and a couple of consortia that are already set up for this are looking to reproduce the experiment with different equipment, as well.
So changing the distance is absolutely the best thing to do, but it's not easy in the slightest.
All this is showing is that neutrinos travel through the Earth faster than light travels through a "vacuum". That a vacuum isn't absolutely vacuous isn't a new idea. Light is more interacting, it should be expected to travel slower.
P.S. though if they were different, then neutrinos from distant super-nova have been showing up at the wrong time.
EPT
