|
On September 23 2011 05:23 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
Maybe they made an error in the length of the tube? 732km is long distance, prone to mistakes ? Maybe even a couple of cm's could make a difference?
Dunno lol, but this shit, I find it interesting :p
Well they probably measured the length with light (of which they know the speed very precisely)
|
Damn, the error on that is low enough that it could be a huge find considering what most of our current laws are based on. I always thought that tachyons were possible but didn't expect something like this.
|
On September 23 2011 05:24 Blasterion wrote:I will say this, We should stop CERN before they create a time machine with this technology! They will create a dystopia ruled by CERN it will be the end of the world as we know it. + Show Spoiler +
didn't you use that joke already? haha
japanese animation proves that physics is worthless to a group of artists anyway
|
On September 23 2011 05:23 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
Maybe they made an error in the length of the tube? 732km is long distance, prone to mistakes ? Maybe even a couple of cm's could make a difference?
Dunno lol, but this shit, I find it interesting :p
are you serious? Its not some kind of school project, they have most advance technologies possible and you think they couldnt measure the lenght of the tube???
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 23 2011 05:23 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
Maybe they made an error in the length of the tube? 732km is long distance, prone to mistakes ? Maybe even a couple of cm's could make a difference?
Dunno lol, but this shit, I find it interesting :p
If there is a systematic error, which is probably the most likely answer, it will be something a lot more subtle than this. Also it's not a tube, it's neutrinos travelling through the ground from CERN to this lab in Italy.
|
15000 times is a lot of times to measure it... hopefully other people test out the expirement and get something similar. this could be a huge discovery
|
On September 23 2011 05:23 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
Maybe they made an error in the length of the tube? 732km is long distance, prone to mistakes ? Maybe even a couple of cm's could make a difference?
Dunno lol, but this shit, I find it interesting :p
The idea that these proffesional scientists would make a mistake in tube length or forget to account for the rotation/arc (as mentioned in an earlier post) is quite ignorant. These guys are at the very top of scientific research and have stated they tried to find errors in their research. I HIGHLY doubt someone on this forum can just walk in and guess what they forgot to take into account and check when searching for an error.
|
Whoa whoa...whoa...waiting for confirmation.
|
That would be quite unexpected discovery, lol.
Let's see if it turns out to be some error, new effect or something huge concerning space itself.
|
On September 23 2011 04:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Perhaps they are mistaking the distance between the source and the detection.
Well, you'd hope that sort of thing would be something they'd check before posting it up :D
|
String theory I guess is the only possible current answer to the universe if this is true. Stupid universe, why are you so hard to break?
|
On September 23 2011 05:23 Steel wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2011 05:00 cptKewk wrote:On September 23 2011 04:52 DarkEnergy wrote:On September 23 2011 04:50 cptKewk wrote:On September 23 2011 04:39 SomeONEx wrote:
I have never really understood my good 'ole teacher when he told me that things can't be faster then the speed of light. "It's only a matter of time before "we" break the laws" said to him, and it seems (for now) as though I was right. I would say that it is more likely to be a mistake. I mean why are these neutrino different from others? that is what I don't get. They are just subatomic particles. As far as i knew they shot one from each side and let them collide creating exotic particle's and then they analyse it. You mean that they collided the neutrinos and measured the energy of the created particles? makes sense, haven't read the explanation of the experiment but what I meant was why haven't we seen neutrinos move faster than light before? (maybe you answered that just now and I misunderstood you) Clearly something weird is going on. I don't even think it's physically possible to observe something travelling faster than light, simply because something faster than light doesn't have mass. According to the laws of relativity they have a negative proper time which is something we don't even understand.
Well this is one of the things that confused me. Although I guess its entirely coming from the fact that I am very used to the current relativistic view of things with massless particles being able to go at the speed of light. But if you have something that is at the speed of light, it cant have mass. Yet to actually have neutrinos you need mass otherwise you wouldn't be able to get the fluctuations in their probability wave of "being" one of the three types of neutrinos...
Then again, although anything travelling at the speed of light has to be massless, that doesn't necessarily mean that particles (hypothetically) travelling faster than the speed of light have to be. Its that whole, you cant accelerate past the speed of light, nor can you decelerate below it if you're already travelling faster than it. Whichever side you're on, you're stuck with. So these neutrinos were created travelling faster than the speed of light? I don't particularly mind that, if it comes out that these reading are accurate. Surely then they just become some weird cut off from the hypothetical tachyon?
I mean, that because I'm very tired I'm just rambling, but it is interesting to contemplate.
Another thing to ponder would be seeing the symmetry between a particles anti particle, and the same particle travelling backwards through time, and then the parity violations found in antiparticles, would further testing need to be done on these "new-found" neutrinos to try and find the same parity violation? It would certainly help to verify the results.
Wait... I definitely think I got something wrong or mixed up there... I think I've gone beyond the line of physics I can do when sleep deprived. I'll come see you all tomorrow morning when I can actually take part in the discussion.
|
|
|
"But Dr Ereditato and his colleagues have been carrying out an experiment for the last three years that seems to suggest neutrinos have done just that."
O_o
|
I like nutrinoz and their mysterious ways
|
Dont think they shot it through a tube, i thought they just shot it through the ground.
|
On September 23 2011 05:13 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2011 05:10 gurrpp wrote:On September 23 2011 04:58 scFoX wrote:On September 23 2011 04:52 Googity wrote:
They ran the same test over 15,000 times always coming up with the same results. The only reason they published their data is so that another laboratory could possibly run the same tests. If multiple labs come up with the same information then physics as we know it just got thrown out the window. Physics as we know it can't be "thrown out of the window." Many people seem to be forgetting that for a new theory to work, it has to explain plausibly everything that is already taken into account by the Standard Model. Of course, it doesn't rule out cases like this, but violations of key concepts are only possible in extreme cases (otherwise we would have discovered it before). We'll have to see what other labs have to say in view of this data. One of the great things about science is when everyone puts their head together and pushes back the limits of human knowledge.  Keep in mind, we don't have a theory that explains all physical phenomenon anyway. We have two theories, special and general relativity, and then string theory, which tries to reconcile the two. Last time I checked there has been no evidence to suggest string theory is true. If it turns out that there is no universal speed limit, then we really do have to throw out everything we know, since the speed of light is important for all of physics. Fortunately, its probably systematic error, so I wouldn't worry about having to throw out everything. String theory doesn't try to reconcile special and general relativity. Special relativity is, as the name implies, a special case of general relativity. String theory, along with other theories of everything are trying to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics. Although this is a really over simplified way of looking at it.
I think he just forgot to put "and quantum physics", and saying string theory is trying to reconcile general relativity, or classical physics with quantum physics. Reads fine then.
|
Maybe this will finally lead to some exposure of wave medium space.
|
On September 23 2011 04:43 Ramong wrote:
SERN wants to take over the world with their new time machine!
lol I just found out what this is today too, it's so wierd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
