It won't "blow Einstein's theory of relativity out of the water" as they put it. Einstein's theory will be refined to match new data for certain circumstances, just as Einstein's theory refined the Newtonian model of the universe. Remember, we got to the moon using Newtonian mechanics, not Einstein's model because Einstein's model was pretty much irrelevant at the speeds travelled.
When you go faster than light, the time runs slowly. human look for you, he see you make all work fastered (you grow old faster)
If you stop the time for you(all people grow old faster), you must stop move in universe, its about 1 000 000km/h (You see grey ball(proton) - mass of universe and dark matter each the mass its fiel of atom - electron field)
@mirrco1 you aren't making much sense, I don't know whether your science is good because your grammar is so bad :/. btw on CERN, my physics teacher told me that most scientists reject neutrinos going faster than the speed of light, light arrives everywhere at the same time from its frame of reference, time is stopped for a photon at the speed of light, surely if you could go faster then from the neutrinos frame of reference it would go back in time?
@jammydodger128 Technically your teacher is right, if you could exceed light speed you would go back in time, but that's according to relativity. But if relativity is wrong... it's not
hi,no problem run faster than c(300000km/s)but its problem to check this speed,no exist measurement device.Easy example, you stay on desert.you have 2 lasers.One laser1 light to right and laser2 light to left.speed from you to laser its c, but speed from laser1 to laser2 its 2c.Problem its measeure this speed.Because laser1 see laser2 in half way,but in real its 2far than laser1 see.
Look at ORION, You see star-betelgeuse,You see still red giand.But in real time maybe BlackHole
Using relativistic tools such as atomic clocks and common-view GPS in order to beat relativity with proof over a small distance kind of raises the "error" bar a little.
I still do want something more interesting than having a 2D TV and aging ignorance when I go near the speed of light.
@TwifyIndustries No...? "It appears that the Universe is expanding at 80 km/sec/Mpc (statistical error = 17 km/sec/Mpc), as calculated by the Hubble Space Telescope's Key Project team". I don't exactly understand the units, but it's definitely not faster than light.
@stevenhelock "80 km/sec/Mpc" is a measure of acceleration, not speed. It means that for 2 objects of 1 Mpc separation the objects will be traveling away from eachother at 80km/sec. Double the distance (2 Mpc) they will be traveling away from eachother at 160km/sec. This means that 2 objects 3750 Megaparsecs apart will be travelling away from eachother at the speed of light. The observable universe is 17,000 Mpc accross, so it's edges are expanding ~4.5x light speed. GO MATH!
@TwifyIndustries There is a certain distance we can see outside in the universe, but we can't see the entire universe. This distance is called the particle horizon. The reason why we cannot see past this is because we need light to see. The only reason why that light isn't coming through past the particle horizon must be because those galaxies moving far away very fast.
@TwifyIndustries Yes, but objects in the universe aren't moving THROUGH space faster than light. It's space itself that's expanding (or stretching) causing the intervening matter to have an apparent speed exceeding that of light.
Imagine drawing a bunch of dots on a balloon. When you blow up the balloon the dots move away from eachother. They appear to travel faster than "dot-speed" (Which is 0 because they don't move with respect to the balloon's surface).
WTF about it, I think it doesn't really matter, of cource in deep space beam fueled travel we can move faster than the speed of light with a color sling shot drive. We're alive now and life can move faster than light; call it the speed of color if it needs a name.
SmexyBeastChannel I'll tell you why you're wrong.. If you knew relativity you would know why. It is explained that a car driving at any certain speed with its lights off, then flicks them on at any given time while the car is moving, the speed of light SHOULD be added to the cars speed. Making it roughly faster than "c". But in reality, the light that is flickered on contracts. This is what would happen to your body. Unnoticeable, like the light, but it will happen.
ALL of my investigations seem to point to the conclusion that they are small particles, each carrying so small a charge that we justified in calling them neutrons. They move with great velocity exceeding that of light! Nikola Tesla July 10, 1932
@bjmbijelic nothing, to this day moves faster than light, these 'findings' at CERN have something wrong in them, it's very easy to make a mistake when synchronizing the clocks. Relativity on the other hand has been tested in practice many, many times, in different ways, Relativity is what makes GPS work, and how the very clocks used at CERN are synchronized, in other words this video says 'they are going to prove relativity is wrong, using theory of relativity'
@VERGIS92 Its so funny to read your comment because you are just like one of those people who said that the planet was flat! ha ha ha! you simply keep denying the results until the very end. Well now the experiment has been done several times and the same results show again and again what more proof do you need? The speed of light is slow thats why it takes thousands of years for it to reach us from distant stars the ultimate speed can only be something that gets from A to B instantly
@boxingisbest there are things that may be moving instantly from A to B, but it can only be massless information, the Neutrino being non-zero mass cannot exceed C. The scientists are doing something wrong, because the platform has the error built in, to be proved right it would have to be reproduced on a new experiment platform as well. But you don't seem to understand how well tested relativity is and also how easy it is to make a mistake in physics
@VERGIS92 First of all there are today non facilities that are better for doing these experiments than the LHC in the entire world.Have you realise that with this platform you say has errors buildt in they have found whats probably the higgs? the theory of relativity has never been proved thats why its still called a THEORY, but the Neutrinos has been PROVED trough several experiments to travel faster than the speed of light get the difference?
@boxingisbest 'Relativity has never been proven' ? you are completely wrong! , all main predictable effects of Special , and General relativity have been proven in practice, effects such as: time dilation, mass-energy equivalence, subatomic particles that live X seconds when at zero speed, end up living much longer when accelerated at high speeds, as long as 30X seconds. also orbiting satellites fall back in time by huge margin every day
@boxingisbest Using GPS, which works on relativity equations to synchronize its clocks, to make a speed measurement on Neutrinos, and then to say relativity is wrong, it does not make sense, is like saying GPS is wrong. Relativity goes back 300 years, it's not just Einstein who made it, it's Galileo, Rieman, Plank, Minkoski and many others, and you think these thinkers are going to be proven wrong in a days work
@boxingisbest not CERN, I am talking about the Neutrino experiment which transmits from CERN, receives at Italy, and uses a GPS configuration to measure Neutrino speed. it's VERY easy to make a mistake , only when this 'superspeed' is confirmed again and again using more accurate and short distances, I will believe, until then the scientists will remain divided, and I am on the skeptics side
@VERGIS92 While it's true that the experiment needs to be confirmed, 60 ns is *huge* by modern standards. Precision that is orders of magnitude smaller than that is routine in engineering these days.
mmmmk well say i was in a spaceship traveling at exactly the speed of light (perfectly possible), if I were to stand up and walk forward I would be beating the speed of light. Because the spaceship is moving at the speed of light, and im in it, so therefore im moving at the speed of light, by me walking forward at say 2kmph my speed is then added to the speed of light to give my overall speed, which is then 2kmph faster than the speed of light. EINSTEIN U MAD BRO?
What is the difference between the clock rates in Switzerland and Italy? The gravitational field at these two locations would not be exactly the same and this would cause the two clocks to tick at a different rate. There is no precise way to determine this difference. For one thing, the time differential would not be consistent. Instabilities of the earth's crust, seismic dynamics, would constantly shift the earth's center of mass and thus the field intensity at the earth's surface.
@nohabitualthinking you people seriously think that you know better than the scientists at Cern? Don't realize that they already considered all of your arguments?
@VazGuedes000 Scientists are humans, and they do sometimes make unbelievable mistakes, they all have! especially when working in large groups, Einstein had said the nuclear bomb was not possible, others tried to smash atom nuclei using alpha particles, (not realizing simple electric charge theory +ve and +ve repulse), it took NAZI scientists to figure it out, it won't be long before the mistake at the CERN 'superfast' neutrino is finally revealed
60 nanoseconds faster than light would have done... not by much...
Could E=Mc2 realy be E=M*The speed of neutrino2?
The difference in the mathematics would be so minor, I don't think anybody would have noticed, especially as decimals and continue forever, and we don't have forever.
@JessAlexanderD We've witnessed a super nova, the neutrinos arrived exactly as predicted. Had they added the extra 60 nanoseconds, the neutrinos would have arrived 3 years before the expected time. The sixtysymbols channel does way better job of explaining it.
Einstein said - NOthing can travel faster than the speed of light. No thing. Neutrino is no thing. It can pass trough everything without making any change to its structure. Einstein was right.
_____Dude, are you deliberately trollin'? The speed of light has been exceeded by multiple experiments over the years! Do a Google on "Dr. Lijun Wang" and Princeton University. Hell, the speed of light gets violated every time photons are made to "tunnel." I'm not even gonna start about what the Italian National Research Council was talkin' about a DECADE ago! Science is the pursuit of truth, dude, not dogma. Give it up!
@zorandesign Relativity doesn't state that nothing can go faster than the speed of light, it just states that nothing can be accelerated up to the speed of light. If a particle is created already going at the speed of light (like a photon is) or faster it can carry on travelling at that speed.
Neutrinos are particles (or "things") and they cannot pass through everything, otherwise they'd be undetectable. They're just really small so they're much less likely to crash into other particles.
Great, now they're going to collide 2 neutrinos in to each other going faster than the speed of light and going to destroy us all or create another universe. When they collided 2 particles together going close to the speed of light they experienced events that occurred in the early stages of the universe.
This is madness. This is so dangerous that it can destroy everything. The only reason someone would do this for science, is to create the most powerful weapon ever. And what are weapons designed to do?.. you science nubs have to start thinking outside the ''science-box''
Well it's looking like E=MC^2 still stands true for now, So don't everyone get to big headed. Here is a link, and it says there not done testing yet and it still has to be proven.
Einstein would be proud. It's the duty of every teacher to empower the student to be even better. This makes sense if you consider entropy and the loss of fidelity due to cloning. If you don't make the next generation better than the last, there is the possibility that the knowledge or skills will degrade with time. So, I for one am glad that E=MC^2 could be broken. And I'm sure, somewhere, Einstein is smiling.
This media broadcast gives the impression that neutrinos accelerated up to light speed and then breeched the energy equivalence barrier...
It gives people the impression that 'nothing' can travel faster then light...which is not true... what Einstein implied was that no particle with mass can 'break' the light speed barrier...
but if the particle always travels faster then light...then there is no issue.
Always the same with the media, total misinterpretation and misrepresentation...
neutrinos are part of star output, but i have been asking: what about the input that happens before the output? maybe the speed of light as we have known it, is determined by the light output of stars. what if the speed of input is faster than star output?
To be fair. The LHC is absolutely clean and in a vacuum. Shoot light down same chamber, without magnets, and it would probably move faster than 3000,000 kilometers/sec..(Just my thoughts)
@marga1020 The less matter to fight against, the easier to move. Space (inner and outer) have all kinds of matter such as hydrogen, helium, etc...Lets say outside galaxy is 1 atmosphere, inside galaxy but outside solar system is 2, inside solar system is 3, just inside Earths is 4 and sea lvl is actually very high pressure and none being a true vacuum. The LHC is virtually clean of all matter.
@MegaWho123456123 Particles, energy...that are 'microscale' or smaller than atomic size are essentially considered neither particle nor wave, or both... the physical shape is irrelevant... they don't have a physical shape...
In textbooks you might see specific symbols...or weird drawings... but these aren't accurate representations.... humans aren't capable of conceptualizing energy at a subatomic level... no more than you could conceptualize the texture of electricity!
We already know that stuff moves faster than Einstein's proposed speed, just look at the red shift of the most distant objects; they're hauling way faster than light; space itself moves faster than light - and that shouldn't be too much of a shock to anyone.
@dmkramerica How can space move faster than light? If you refer to expansion, it's just a theory and even in theory is not faster than light, also the Doppler effect (red shift) is not breaking the speed of light. Nothing to this day in the Universe is moving faster than light, and it's not because of experiments or believes or theories. It's because of those equations in special and general relativity.
Doesn't recent successes in quantum teleportation that is made possible by the properties of quantum entanglement prove that there is really not speed limit in the universe?
A fine question, but the answer is 'no.' The nonlocality of quantum mechanics (entanglement) still prohibits superluminal transport of mass and information-bearing signalling. For clarification, use 'Google Books' to read excerpts from J.S. Bell in "Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics" (Paper #24, p.232-247)
@EscapeNewJersey Quantum entanglement is an aberration of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, which by many is still thought to be an incomplete theory. The problem is the supposition that any system has an indefinite state until measurement, good hypothesis in relative terms, the theory is consistent. But philosophical implications might get aberrant. Quantum teleportation is sending qubits instead of bits. So it basically "sends" a probability package.
HOLD UP!!! with light being the speed limit. if those particles actually beat light? according to my theory. you just fuckin created a short cut through space. like a wormhole..meaning you just sent a message to the past....if it would have to have arrived before it was sent...right?
@MrVaddiReddy --well heres the thing...if its arriving before its sent a future act is occuring in the present meaning a present act occured in the past. kinda like and a past event occured in the future. being that the light would have arrived before the past event. in other words. going faster than the speed of light reverses time..its complicated. if you want me to make a vid on it i can. i have another one posted already but its not the same thing.
@3Skitz1Production3 I'm not a physicist but neutrinos aren't classified as matter so even if they did move faster than the speed of light, then maybe it means something big in another area of physics but doesn't necessarily mean that matter is able to move past the speed of light because it is supposed to take an infinite amount of energy to move past it. I saw your Universe Theory and I think it sounds more logical than what we have currently but I have no idea if it complies with physics.
@MadeinHell2 ---what about acceleration. like throwing a baseball. everything with speed and mass has momentum but light has to accelerate to TRAVEL at any speed. maybe the acceleration is just so rapid that we cant detect it but we can however use math to know how far the light has traveled at a given amount of time..
@MadeinHell2 yea but its particles have to have some kind of mass or else gravity wouldnt effect the course of light. such as going around planets or black holes
Respond to this video... ------even if light traveled faster than itself. it would have to arrive before it left. but is that subject to the theory of simultanality ?
thays what some other scientists are suggesting yes. That those particles took some form of shortcut by traveling through other higher dimensions and that thus einstein's theory is stll true but only in 3 dimensions
Our view of the universe has changed countless times in the past who's to say it won't change again I agree that light is not a constant but must have a limit there must be a start and a finish a maximum or a minimum the work these people do for us today will one day lead to something very special.
The neutrinos did not travel faster than light would have done. They traveled faster than we THINK light would have done. No one shot a beam of light parallel to the beam of neutrinos, because light can't travel through the crust of the Earth like neutrinos can. The speed of light is not a constant, pure and simple.
einstein's theory is not at stack here, it's causality.
it has been showen mathamaticly, that if you can treavel faster then light, you can break cuasality, and for short, know tomorows news, before they happen.
that is why have a max' speed at the speed of light is such a strong fundation, as without it, you have nonsanse.
This really shows that people think they know it all all the time. With all the discoveries that have been made in the past 100 years I think pretty much anything is possible now as long as you try to find in.
This can be truth, as in they break the speed of light but they've only have made research in particles as they call it "neutrinos". A big mass such as space ship will be impossible to travel at these speeds because it will not support these speeds, they will break down. Only thing that could help is a highly resistant man made space ship and lot of research & development in aerodynamics.
@elchicoboy I don't anyone is going as far as to say we could make some sort of transport faster than the speed of light, that is way beyond anyone's suggestions.
@tommyrharper57 Teleportations devices are extremely high to make as in sort of impossible. on the other side, speed of light its just particles traveling at high speeds making its destination wherever you want to. Its just a matter of time to see what the future might bring to us. And since the universe is so impracticable, well who knows what might just bring to us.
@tommyrharper57 indeed. that's what i said. our transport devices are impossible to travel at these speeds even aluminum alloy, carbon fiber, etc. its just a high resistant material and aerodynamics involved. lot of research and development can be done, probably in 20-30 years we will see prototype vehicles that could travel at the speed of light or faster.
@Kudzaiofficial no way science is the discovery of knowledge and truth religion is the ascension of ignorance, obedience and lies. If society embraced science they would respect it not follow it.
2. "...and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth’s surface with a mean velocity of about four hundred and seventy-one thousand two hundred and forty kilometers per second.” (ART OF TRANSMITTING ELECTRICAL ENERGY THROUGH THE NATURAL MEDIUMS, Nikola Tesla, USA Patent No. 787,412. Application May 16, 1900, patented April 18, 1905.)
1. “The most essential requirement is, however, that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain interval of time, which I have estimated to be not less then one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second..."
i find this very difficult to believe ,but if it is correct its mad to think something reached its destination before it left its starting point. WTF?
It is my belief that CERN was created to cause beached whales and dolphins. The magnetic fields created are so powerful as to affect the brains of migrating sea creatures and birds, thus causing them to be beached. Na_no, New_Tree_No. Total garbage. Such science does not even exist. CERN was created to remove charged clouds over Europe and caused beached whales and dolphins using ultra-powerful magnetic fields.
Disclosure is coming soon. An Earth like planet 20 light years away and now the speed of light has been broken. Be ready for the news to disclose info
There haven't been updates because the original announcement was based on bad measurements. Their mistake was to fire off a Press Release, based on their hunger for fame rather than good science. You can use Wikipedia to read about the "N ray" embarrassment of 1903, and the "cold fusion" embarrassment of 1989, to see how this current episode fits into history. CERN is a really, really big lab -- you'll always find some donkeys in such a large mix, tarnishing the lab's name.
@OtherVerse has this been confirmed or are you one of those annoying people who think their opinion is fact? No offense. If you have any, could you please give evidence?
I get what you're saying. Unfortunately, there's no video evidence tracking my conversations. You can gauge my credibility for yourself, though, by scanning the YouTube comments under a CERNTV video titled "LHCb - The Beauty Experiment." When I pointed out huge important errors in the video, and floated the idea of meeting in person to discuss corrections, the video's producer defended his ego by quoting lines that weren't even in the video. It's quite depressing.
Also, notice that this video has a description that claims "Scientists at CERN ... have discovered sub-atomic particles..." Ha ha! Anyone can Google "neutrino" to see the long history of these particles. If I claimed to make a shocking new measurement of the U.S. coastline, perhaps they'd give me credit for discovering America.
Yes, the whole description of this Euronews video is full of absurdities. I comment anonymously on YouTube, but anyone can see that Weinberg and Glashow are just two of the iconic physicists publicly criticizing the claims of the OPERA Collaboration (thanks to Google, no one needs to take my word for it).
The physicists Andrew Cohen and Sheldon Glashow (if you don't already know who Glashow is, you can look up that as well) submitted a paper on Sept 29, titled "New Constraints on Neutrino Velocities." ( PDF available at arxiv.org/abs/1109.6562 )
The abstract states: "Thus we refute the superluminal interpretation of the OPERA result. Furthermore, we appeal to [experimental] data to establish strong new limits on the superluminal propagation of high-energy neutrinos." Case closed. Done.
@OtherVerse in quantum physics there s no such thing as "case closed done", remember these are all just theories not proven facts, even your hastily googled cohen-glasgow effect paper is a theory, their assumptions are not universally valid, not all models of faster-than-light neutrinos have to respect these assumptions, welcome to the weird world of quantum physics
@jvanegas14 No. Experimental results on "neutrino oscillations" are explained mathematically, requiring non-zero neutrino masses.
For further clarification of oscillation measurements and their implications, you can search for:
1) Super-Kamiokande
2) Sudbury Neutrino Observatory
Note that massless particles are constrained to move at exactly "c," the speed of light. The OPERA Collaboration's current superluminal delusions derive from tachyon theories, where "c" is unreachably *slow*.
@jvanegas14 Note that even in a non-vacuum, c is always c (photon signals merely "get hung up" in processes while traversing matter, and therefore "show up" slower than c). If you look up "Cerenkov radiation" you'll see that physicists have long understood the behavior of particles that exceed the local light propagation speed in a non-vacuum.
In brief, the OPERA Collaboration is making a very different extreme claim.
@OtherVerse The OPERA neutrino episode was actually a very interesting affair from a number of standpoints. It was an excellent public example of how science, at its best, is conducted. The experimenters practiced excellent due diligence. And then presented their remarkable results, with proper skepticism, for discussion by the scientific community. It is also an excellent example of how even when science is being conducted at its best, the media, blogosphere, & public still get it all wrong.
@sbergman27 You shouldn't state your opinion in such dogmatic terms.
Look at the exact wording in the original CERN Press Release. Not only did it actively stoke the media misrepresentations, but it also revealed a complete misunderstanding of the nature of modern scientific progress. If an undergraduate student had submitted such a gross misunderstanding in a 'philosophy of science' class, it would have earned a failing grade.
This is a repeat of the 1903 'N ray' embarrassment.
@OtherVerse Sean Carroll disagrees: tinyurlDOTcom/3tzjg5y
Anyway, you're overlooking the fact that GSNL != CERN. GSNL did the experiment. You may as well reference Oprah Winfrey. Which demonstrates that you, like the rest of the pubic, look to the wrong places for science news. Read the paper: tinyurlDOTcom/d9uddu4
View the presentation: tinyurlDOTcom/858gywq
Show me a 1st party acting irresponsibly. I note that you tend to disagree for disagreement's sake. Thus I limit my time allotted to you.
@OtherVerse No, there haven't been updates because they hadn't published their "findings" on a peer-review based journal. It could've been published on arXiv or something.
The OPERA claims were submitted Sept 22 (arXiv:1109.4897v1).
More importantly, Cohen and Glashow already (Sept 29) submitted a crushingly simple appeal to preexisting experimental data and well-understood particle processes to show that the OPERA claims (the "anomaly") can't stand.
Note that some OPERA Collaboration members refused to have their names associated with the initial faster-than-light claims. To say "it hasn't been published" is to say: "sloppy results are sloppy."
@OtherVerse there it is. They published it on arXiv to maybe get some fame, but they weren't claiming it was true. They calculated the measurements and published it on arXiv instead of a peer-review journal.
@OtherVerse One small essential detail. CERN has nothing to do with this announcement. CERN only provides a beam of neutrinos to Gran Sasso. The announcement was done by the Opera experiment, based in Italy. They are the ones who performed these measurements and came out with these findings.
May I add that they did not do exactly an announcement, but organized a conference at CERN to ask their fellows scientists to help them understand where they got it wrong, if anything.
In fact, the CERN website clearly shows that a CERN Press Release went out on Sept 23 ("PR19.11").
Couple that with the fact that the "seminar" was webcast on CERN's webpages , and you can see that all of my comments are accurate. Some people simply prefer celebrity instead of actual stature in their field. Some people are gripped by delusion, and end up confusing the two. It's sad.
@OtherVerse "Their mistake was to fire off a Press Release, based on their hunger for fame rather than good science. " that's not how it happened ?! *facepalm* you're a loud mouthed ignoramus
They only said this to help them obtain more funding. The finding was false and they new it was.
TheEskatos 6 days ago
It won't "blow Einstein's theory of relativity out of the water" as they put it. Einstein's theory will be refined to match new data for certain circumstances, just as Einstein's theory refined the Newtonian model of the universe. Remember, we got to the moon using Newtonian mechanics, not Einstein's model because Einstein's model was pretty much irrelevant at the speeds travelled.
St00sh13 3 weeks ago 5
When you go faster than light, the time runs slowly. human look for you, he see you make all work fastered (you grow old faster)
If you stop the time for you(all people grow old faster), you must stop move in universe, its about 1 000 000km/h (You see grey ball(proton) - mass of universe and dark matter each the mass its fiel of atom - electron field)
mirrco1 3 weeks ago
@mirrco1 you aren't making much sense, I don't know whether your science is good because your grammar is so bad :/. btw on CERN, my physics teacher told me that most scientists reject neutrinos going faster than the speed of light, light arrives everywhere at the same time from its frame of reference, time is stopped for a photon at the speed of light, surely if you could go faster then from the neutrinos frame of reference it would go back in time?
jammydodger128 5 days ago
@jammydodger128 Technically your teacher is right, if you could exceed light speed you would go back in time, but that's according to relativity. But if relativity is wrong... it's not
TheResidentSkeptic 4 days ago
@jammydodger128
hi,no problem run faster than c(300000km/s)but its problem to check this speed,no exist measurement device.Easy example, you stay on desert.you have 2 lasers.One laser1 light to right and laser2 light to left.speed from you to laser its c, but speed from laser1 to laser2 its 2c.Problem its measeure this speed.Because laser1 see laser2 in half way,but in real its 2far than laser1 see.
Look at ORION, You see star-betelgeuse,You see still red giand.But in real time maybe BlackHole
mirrco1 4 days ago
antihydrogen and hydrogen from black hole its fastest when bond on end of radius universe.
It maked the explode(dump people caled big bang) When you link particle from past and from this time = teleport.
atoms breaked in black hore are teleported to end of radius univese for 0second.
that big bang not exist, its infinity reaction on end of radius univese.
mirrco1 3 weeks ago
Using relativistic tools such as atomic clocks and common-view GPS in order to beat relativity with proof over a small distance kind of raises the "error" bar a little.
I still do want something more interesting than having a 2D TV and aging ignorance when I go near the speed of light.
beingsensible 1 month ago
Is it now confirmed?
Zoidmatrix 1 month ago
@Zoidmatrix
No. It isn't confirmed.
lambdaofbacon 1 month ago
@Zoidmatrix It was wrong.
Wilson1592 3 weeks ago
@Wilson1592 yeah
Zoidmatrix 3 weeks ago
Go science!
deadlycheezcake 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well I can't add the link so just try this it's WORTH IT
arxiv.org archive number 1109.4897v2 in thier search query
Thegamingkid1000 1 month ago
check out this link
Thegamingkid1000 1 month ago
300 meters per sec/ not per kg/
jesseortiz666x 1 month ago
I don't really like the description of this video, isn't the universe itself expanding faster than the speed of light?
TwifyIndustries 1 month ago
@TwifyIndustries No...? "It appears that the Universe is expanding at 80 km/sec/Mpc (statistical error = 17 km/sec/Mpc), as calculated by the Hubble Space Telescope's Key Project team". I don't exactly understand the units, but it's definitely not faster than light.
stevenhelock 1 month ago
@stevenhelock "80 km/sec/Mpc" is a measure of acceleration, not speed. It means that for 2 objects of 1 Mpc separation the objects will be traveling away from eachother at 80km/sec. Double the distance (2 Mpc) they will be traveling away from eachother at 160km/sec. This means that 2 objects 3750 Megaparsecs apart will be travelling away from eachother at the speed of light. The observable universe is 17,000 Mpc accross, so it's edges are expanding ~4.5x light speed. GO MATH!
TheResidentSkeptic 4 days ago
@TwifyIndustries There is a certain distance we can see outside in the universe, but we can't see the entire universe. This distance is called the particle horizon. The reason why we cannot see past this is because we need light to see. The only reason why that light isn't coming through past the particle horizon must be because those galaxies moving far away very fast.
pythor2 1 month ago
@TwifyIndustries Yes, but objects in the universe aren't moving THROUGH space faster than light. It's space itself that's expanding (or stretching) causing the intervening matter to have an apparent speed exceeding that of light.
Imagine drawing a bunch of dots on a balloon. When you blow up the balloon the dots move away from eachother. They appear to travel faster than "dot-speed" (Which is 0 because they don't move with respect to the balloon's surface).
TheResidentSkeptic 4 days ago
WTF about it, I think it doesn't really matter, of cource in deep space beam fueled travel we can move faster than the speed of light with a color sling shot drive. We're alive now and life can move faster than light; call it the speed of color if it needs a name.
nythawk67 1 month ago
Would not surprise me at all that the speed of light can be broken,
timsalas14 1 month ago
SmexyBeastChannel I'll tell you why you're wrong.. If you knew relativity you would know why. It is explained that a car driving at any certain speed with its lights off, then flicks them on at any given time while the car is moving, the speed of light SHOULD be added to the cars speed. Making it roughly faster than "c". But in reality, the light that is flickered on contracts. This is what would happen to your body. Unnoticeable, like the light, but it will happen.
SEVEN1TRAE 2 months ago
ALL of my investigations seem to point to the conclusion that they are small particles, each carrying so small a charge that we justified in calling them neutrons. They move with great velocity exceeding that of light! Nikola Tesla July 10, 1932
bjmbijelic 2 months ago
@bjmbijelic nothing, to this day moves faster than light, these 'findings' at CERN have something wrong in them, it's very easy to make a mistake when synchronizing the clocks. Relativity on the other hand has been tested in practice many, many times, in different ways, Relativity is what makes GPS work, and how the very clocks used at CERN are synchronized, in other words this video says 'they are going to prove relativity is wrong, using theory of relativity'
VERGIS92 2 months ago
@VERGIS92 Its so funny to read your comment because you are just like one of those people who said that the planet was flat! ha ha ha! you simply keep denying the results until the very end. Well now the experiment has been done several times and the same results show again and again what more proof do you need? The speed of light is slow thats why it takes thousands of years for it to reach us from distant stars the ultimate speed can only be something that gets from A to B instantly
boxingisbest 1 month ago
@boxingisbest there are things that may be moving instantly from A to B, but it can only be massless information, the Neutrino being non-zero mass cannot exceed C. The scientists are doing something wrong, because the platform has the error built in, to be proved right it would have to be reproduced on a new experiment platform as well. But you don't seem to understand how well tested relativity is and also how easy it is to make a mistake in physics
VERGIS92 1 month ago
@VERGIS92 First of all there are today non facilities that are better for doing these experiments than the LHC in the entire world.Have you realise that with this platform you say has errors buildt in they have found whats probably the higgs? the theory of relativity has never been proved thats why its still called a THEORY, but the Neutrinos has been PROVED trough several experiments to travel faster than the speed of light get the difference?
boxingisbest 1 month ago
@boxingisbest 'Relativity has never been proven' ? you are completely wrong! , all main predictable effects of Special , and General relativity have been proven in practice, effects such as: time dilation, mass-energy equivalence, subatomic particles that live X seconds when at zero speed, end up living much longer when accelerated at high speeds, as long as 30X seconds. also orbiting satellites fall back in time by huge margin every day
VERGIS92 1 month ago
@boxingisbest Using GPS, which works on relativity equations to synchronize its clocks, to make a speed measurement on Neutrinos, and then to say relativity is wrong, it does not make sense, is like saying GPS is wrong. Relativity goes back 300 years, it's not just Einstein who made it, it's Galileo, Rieman, Plank, Minkoski and many others, and you think these thinkers are going to be proven wrong in a days work
VERGIS92 1 month ago
@VERGIS92 Let me get this straight you consider the large hadron collider and thousands of scientists a days work?
boxingisbest 1 month ago
@boxingisbest not CERN, I am talking about the Neutrino experiment which transmits from CERN, receives at Italy, and uses a GPS configuration to measure Neutrino speed. it's VERY easy to make a mistake , only when this 'superspeed' is confirmed again and again using more accurate and short distances, I will believe, until then the scientists will remain divided, and I am on the skeptics side
VERGIS92 1 month ago
@VERGIS92 The margin of error is smaller when measured at large distances.
ryder187mac 1 month ago
@VERGIS92 While it's true that the experiment needs to be confirmed, 60 ns is *huge* by modern standards. Precision that is orders of magnitude smaller than that is routine in engineering these days.
eventhisidistaken 1 month ago
They failed to mention Chuck Norris was at the controls.
jasonguyperson 2 months ago 5
Maybe it went back in time :)
4TheTurtle 2 months ago
you people seriously think that you know better than the scientists at Cern? Don't realize that they already considered all of your arguments?
VazGuedes000 2 months ago
now things becomes interesting, after we proof existence of higgs bosons, we must found what the hell happend to this neutrino
brahim121985brahim 2 months ago
@brahim121985brahim CERN has announced they are 90% certain that the higgs boson particle doesn't exist.
themixedarts 2 months ago
@themixedarts "doesn't exist" or exist" !!!!!!! i mean when did they announced that ?
brahim121985brahim 2 months ago
mmmmk well say i was in a spaceship traveling at exactly the speed of light (perfectly possible), if I were to stand up and walk forward I would be beating the speed of light. Because the spaceship is moving at the speed of light, and im in it, so therefore im moving at the speed of light, by me walking forward at say 2kmph my speed is then added to the speed of light to give my overall speed, which is then 2kmph faster than the speed of light. EINSTEIN U MAD BRO?
SmexyBeastChannel 2 months ago
@SmexyBeastChannel what do u mean u walk at 2km/hour, time has come to a halt!
HiFiVibe 2 months ago
@SmexyBeastChannel Wrong.
hznfrst 2 months ago
The two clocks could never be precisely synchronized.
nohabitualthinking 2 months ago
@nohabitualthinking Why not? I don't understand how gravity has any effect on clo.cks..
HaloZero147 2 months ago
Thus, any measurement of speed would be meaningless between Switzerland and Italy at the nano second level.
nohabitualthinking 2 months ago
What is the difference between the clock rates in Switzerland and Italy? The gravitational field at these two locations would not be exactly the same and this would cause the two clocks to tick at a different rate. There is no precise way to determine this difference. For one thing, the time differential would not be consistent. Instabilities of the earth's crust, seismic dynamics, would constantly shift the earth's center of mass and thus the field intensity at the earth's surface.
nohabitualthinking 2 months ago
@nohabitualthinking you people seriously think that you know better than the scientists at Cern? Don't realize that they already considered all of your arguments?
VazGuedes000 2 months ago
@VazGuedes000 Scientists are humans, and they do sometimes make unbelievable mistakes, they all have! especially when working in large groups, Einstein had said the nuclear bomb was not possible, others tried to smash atom nuclei using alpha particles, (not realizing simple electric charge theory +ve and +ve repulse), it took NAZI scientists to figure it out, it won't be long before the mistake at the CERN 'superfast' neutrino is finally revealed
VERGIS92 2 months ago
Chuck Norris already knew that...
deathwoulf 2 months ago
could just of been a faulty stop watch they used .....
EvlDrPorkChp 2 months ago
I already knew that the sub-atomic particles are those of our souls. This energy makes things alive. The +- theory has to research.
rsahat 2 months ago
60 nanoseconds faster than light would have done... not by much...
Could E=Mc2 realy be E=M*The speed of neutrino2?
The difference in the mathematics would be so minor, I don't think anybody would have noticed, especially as decimals and continue forever, and we don't have forever.
JessAlexanderD 2 months ago
@JessAlexanderD We've witnessed a super nova, the neutrinos arrived exactly as predicted. Had they added the extra 60 nanoseconds, the neutrinos would have arrived 3 years before the expected time. The sixtysymbols channel does way better job of explaining it.
urantivirus 2 months ago
@JessAlexanderD: How do we know the speed of a neutrino is the new max velocity?
JasonW7467 2 months ago
Its also because photons are more charged than neutrinos and arent slowed.
BLEOS33 2 months ago
why don't you idiots PM each other instead of rant at each other through pages upon pages of comments? Fucking idiots.
iPhapxlol 2 months ago
Geez.. neutrino is known to be hard measured particle, so this time it got a little bit more inaccurate, wow.
4FunPlayin 2 months ago
Einstein said - NOthing can travel faster than the speed of light. No thing. Neutrino is no thing. It can pass trough everything without making any change to its structure. Einstein was right.
zorandesign 2 months ago
@zorandesign
_____Dude, are you deliberately trollin'? The speed of light has been exceeded by multiple experiments over the years! Do a Google on "Dr. Lijun Wang" and Princeton University. Hell, the speed of light gets violated every time photons are made to "tunnel." I'm not even gonna start about what the Italian National Research Council was talkin' about a DECADE ago! Science is the pursuit of truth, dude, not dogma. Give it up!
Egglesplork 2 months ago
@zorandesign Relativity doesn't state that nothing can go faster than the speed of light, it just states that nothing can be accelerated up to the speed of light. If a particle is created already going at the speed of light (like a photon is) or faster it can carry on travelling at that speed.
Neutrinos are particles (or "things") and they cannot pass through everything, otherwise they'd be undetectable. They're just really small so they're much less likely to crash into other particles.
annoloki 2 months ago
@annoloki It reallyjust mean these neutrinos are lighter than light XP
BLEOS33 2 months ago
Great, now they're going to collide 2 neutrinos in to each other going faster than the speed of light and going to destroy us all or create another universe. When they collided 2 particles together going close to the speed of light they experienced events that occurred in the early stages of the universe.
SatanFang 2 months ago
This is madness. This is so dangerous that it can destroy everything. The only reason someone would do this for science, is to create the most powerful weapon ever. And what are weapons designed to do?.. you science nubs have to start thinking outside the ''science-box''
Blazestalker100 2 months ago
Well it's looking like E=MC^2 still stands true for now, So don't everyone get to big headed. Here is a link, and it says there not done testing yet and it still has to be proven.
printxii 2 months ago
Einstein would be proud. It's the duty of every teacher to empower the student to be even better. This makes sense if you consider entropy and the loss of fidelity due to cloning. If you don't make the next generation better than the last, there is the possibility that the knowledge or skills will degrade with time. So, I for one am glad that E=MC^2 could be broken. And I'm sure, somewhere, Einstein is smiling.
FrankenPC 2 months ago
galaxies moving away from us speeds up overtime can and will travel faster than the speed of light..
sniped101 2 months ago
just a long shot but what if a supermassive blackhole chocked on a megasuppermassive star
1dogeez 2 months ago
@1dogeez There isn't a star big enough to choke a black hole.
Metallygod 2 months ago
one day dis earth proves to be wrong...^_^
PlayLikeThat 2 months ago
1 blend joke on the top comments please
TheMusicDope 2 months ago
LET say I am a neutrino. When I run on an oval track, I will hit my back....thats too fast..
williealmilla 2 months ago
Will the neutrino arrive before being sent?
93n371cfr34k 2 months ago
@93n371cfr34k That's head ache causing lol
mimikawaii7386 2 months ago
This media broadcast gives the impression that neutrinos accelerated up to light speed and then breeched the energy equivalence barrier...
It gives people the impression that 'nothing' can travel faster then light...which is not true... what Einstein implied was that no particle with mass can 'break' the light speed barrier...
but if the particle always travels faster then light...then there is no issue.
Always the same with the media, total misinterpretation and misrepresentation...
MumblingMickey 2 months ago
neutrinos are part of star output, but i have been asking: what about the input that happens before the output? maybe the speed of light as we have known it, is determined by the light output of stars. what if the speed of input is faster than star output?
q7spiz 2 months ago
To be fair. The LHC is absolutely clean and in a vacuum. Shoot light down same chamber, without magnets, and it would probably move faster than 3000,000 kilometers/sec..(Just my thoughts)
CrimsnTiger 3 months ago
@CrimsnTiger I thought the conventional wisdom was that there are no true vacuums?
marga1020 3 months ago
@marga1020 The less matter to fight against, the easier to move. Space (inner and outer) have all kinds of matter such as hydrogen, helium, etc...Lets say outside galaxy is 1 atmosphere, inside galaxy but outside solar system is 2, inside solar system is 3, just inside Earths is 4 and sea lvl is actually very high pressure and none being a true vacuum. The LHC is virtually clean of all matter.
CrimsnTiger 2 months ago
@CrimsnTiger Stands to reason?: light travels faster between galaxies then inside earths atmosphere.
CrimsnTiger 2 months ago
so is a 'neutrino' an energy wave or in a physical form?
MegaWho123456123 3 months ago
@MegaWho123456123 well sonny boy google search wave particle duality then google neutrino bunghole theory
420dankykush 3 months ago
@MegaWho123456123 Particles, energy...that are 'microscale' or smaller than atomic size are essentially considered neither particle nor wave, or both... the physical shape is irrelevant... they don't have a physical shape...
In textbooks you might see specific symbols...or weird drawings... but these aren't accurate representations.... humans aren't capable of conceptualizing energy at a subatomic level... no more than you could conceptualize the texture of electricity!
MumblingMickey 2 months ago
Welp, that confirms it, CERN is now an official badass.
ThePokenerd5 3 months ago
We already know that stuff moves faster than Einstein's proposed speed, just look at the red shift of the most distant objects; they're hauling way faster than light; space itself moves faster than light - and that shouldn't be too much of a shock to anyone.
dmkramerica 3 months ago
@dmkramerica How can space move faster than light? If you refer to expansion, it's just a theory and even in theory is not faster than light, also the Doppler effect (red shift) is not breaking the speed of light. Nothing to this day in the Universe is moving faster than light, and it's not because of experiments or believes or theories. It's because of those equations in special and general relativity.
CaballusKnight 3 months ago
Doesn't recent successes in quantum teleportation that is made possible by the properties of quantum entanglement prove that there is really not speed limit in the universe?
EscapeNewJersey 3 months ago
@EscapeNewJersey
A fine question, but the answer is 'no.' The nonlocality of quantum mechanics (entanglement) still prohibits superluminal transport of mass and information-bearing signalling. For clarification, use 'Google Books' to read excerpts from J.S. Bell in "Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics" (Paper #24, p.232-247)
OtherVerse 3 months ago
@EscapeNewJersey Quantum entanglement is an aberration of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, which by many is still thought to be an incomplete theory. The problem is the supposition that any system has an indefinite state until measurement, good hypothesis in relative terms, the theory is consistent. But philosophical implications might get aberrant. Quantum teleportation is sending qubits instead of bits. So it basically "sends" a probability package.
CaballusKnight 3 months ago
Okay, so how do we use this?
BoristheDragon 3 months ago
i thought CERN was pronounced kern not sern -_-
THEHUGE8BALL 3 months ago
HOLD UP!!! with light being the speed limit. if those particles actually beat light? according to my theory. you just fuckin created a short cut through space. like a wormhole..meaning you just sent a message to the past....if it would have to have arrived before it was sent...right?
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3 Your theory?
MrVaddiReddy 3 months ago
@MrVaddiReddy --well heres the thing...if its arriving before its sent a future act is occuring in the present meaning a present act occured in the past. kinda like and a past event occured in the future. being that the light would have arrived before the past event. in other words. going faster than the speed of light reverses time..its complicated. if you want me to make a vid on it i can. i have another one posted already but its not the same thing.
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3 I'm not a physicist but neutrinos aren't classified as matter so even if they did move faster than the speed of light, then maybe it means something big in another area of physics but doesn't necessarily mean that matter is able to move past the speed of light because it is supposed to take an infinite amount of energy to move past it. I saw your Universe Theory and I think it sounds more logical than what we have currently but I have no idea if it complies with physics.
MrVaddiReddy 3 months ago
@MrVaddiReddy ------i saw a vid where light pulses. went through a cold gas and sped it up just enough to make the light exit before it entered.
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3 The light can't "speed up" it always goes at exactly the same speed.
MadeinHell2 3 months ago
@MadeinHell2 ---what about acceleration. like throwing a baseball. everything with speed and mass has momentum but light has to accelerate to TRAVEL at any speed. maybe the acceleration is just so rapid that we cant detect it but we can however use math to know how far the light has traveled at a given amount of time..
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3 Light is not matter, It's a wave of energy. Therefore it doesn't have mass and can't "accelerate" it always has the same speed.
MadeinHell2 3 months ago
@MadeinHell2 yea but its particles have to have some kind of mass or else gravity wouldnt effect the course of light. such as going around planets or black holes
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@MadeinHell2 true but the force of a black hole is so powerful light does not escape... why is this?
BlackANDRedMaster 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3 thats the video im looking for again. i cant find it....oh wait this is my own post...nm
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
Respond to this video... ------even if light traveled faster than itself. it would have to arrive before it left. but is that subject to the theory of simultanality ?
3Skitz1Production3 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3
Idiot
Capeau 3 months ago
@3Skitz1Production3
thays what some other scientists are suggesting yes. That those particles took some form of shortcut by traveling through other higher dimensions and that thus einstein's theory is stll true but only in 3 dimensions
Capeau 3 months ago
Our view of the universe has changed countless times in the past who's to say it won't change again I agree that light is not a constant but must have a limit there must be a start and a finish a maximum or a minimum the work these people do for us today will one day lead to something very special.
solsm08 3 months ago
The neutrinos did not travel faster than light would have done. They traveled faster than we THINK light would have done. No one shot a beam of light parallel to the beam of neutrinos, because light can't travel through the crust of the Earth like neutrinos can. The speed of light is not a constant, pure and simple.
SuperMagnetizer 3 months ago
stupid news report.
einstein's theory is not at stack here, it's causality.
it has been showen mathamaticly, that if you can treavel faster then light, you can break cuasality, and for short, know tomorows news, before they happen.
that is why have a max' speed at the speed of light is such a strong fundation, as without it, you have nonsanse.
and there's nothing new about nutrinos either.
eyallev 3 months ago
About time. Let's find out something more than what is in the box.
Zander242 3 months ago
I actually heard that this was a miscalculation.
Wassamattawityou 3 months ago
Einstein was a womanizer
Serkant75 3 months ago
The OPERA team actually missed a term, which would lower the time for about 64 ns, making neutrinos 4 ns slower than light. So the fuss was moot.
drrobertoboogie97 3 months ago
No MASS can move faster than the speed of light.. Silly reporter
garrysman 3 months ago
well you see they forgot to factor in special relativity, so their calculation was of course wrong, and that is the end of this story.
PrimaryBandit 3 months ago
So, what happended to that discovery? Is it proven yet??
DallasGreen123 3 months ago
This really shows that people think they know it all all the time. With all the discoveries that have been made in the past 100 years I think pretty much anything is possible now as long as you try to find in.
DeadHappyFilm 3 months ago
This can be truth, as in they break the speed of light but they've only have made research in particles as they call it "neutrinos". A big mass such as space ship will be impossible to travel at these speeds because it will not support these speeds, they will break down. Only thing that could help is a highly resistant man made space ship and lot of research & development in aerodynamics.
elchicoboy 3 months ago
@elchicoboy I don't anyone is going as far as to say we could make some sort of transport faster than the speed of light, that is way beyond anyone's suggestions.
tommyrharper57 3 months ago
@tommyrharper57 Teleportations devices are extremely high to make as in sort of impossible. on the other side, speed of light its just particles traveling at high speeds making its destination wherever you want to. Its just a matter of time to see what the future might bring to us. And since the universe is so impracticable, well who knows what might just bring to us.
elchicoboy 3 months ago
@elchicoboy Yes but at the moment it is pretty much inconceivable with current technology to travel exceeding the speed of light
tommyrharper57 3 months ago
@tommyrharper57 indeed. that's what i said. our transport devices are impossible to travel at these speeds even aluminum alloy, carbon fiber, etc. its just a high resistant material and aerodynamics involved. lot of research and development can be done, probably in 20-30 years we will see prototype vehicles that could travel at the speed of light or faster.
elchicoboy 3 months ago
@elchicoboy what im saying is i doubt it
tommyrharper57 3 months ago
@elchicoboy you are a very optimistic dude.
My prediction is 200 - 300 years. But let's wait and see.
kriptonis 3 months ago
@Kudzaiofficial no way science is the discovery of knowledge and truth religion is the ascension of ignorance, obedience and lies. If society embraced science they would respect it not follow it.
Sumdude54 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2. "...and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth’s surface with a mean velocity of about four hundred and seventy-one thousand two hundred and forty kilometers per second.” (ART OF TRANSMITTING ELECTRICAL ENERGY THROUGH THE NATURAL MEDIUMS, Nikola Tesla, USA Patent No. 787,412. Application May 16, 1900, patented April 18, 1905.)
klopedokle 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. “The most essential requirement is, however, that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain interval of time, which I have estimated to be not less then one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second..."
klopedokle 4 months ago
Forget about atheism
BigBangNeverHappend 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i find this very difficult to believe ,but if it is correct its mad to think something reached its destination before it left its starting point. WTF?
conzj484 4 months ago
fuck this im not learnin new shit
MegaNate6969 4 months ago
It is my belief that CERN was created to cause beached whales and dolphins. The magnetic fields created are so powerful as to affect the brains of migrating sea creatures and birds, thus causing them to be beached. Na_no, New_Tree_No. Total garbage. Such science does not even exist. CERN was created to remove charged clouds over Europe and caused beached whales and dolphins using ultra-powerful magnetic fields.
robotiqz1 4 months ago
Disclosure is coming soon. An Earth like planet 20 light years away and now the speed of light has been broken. Be ready for the news to disclose info
clineber16 4 months ago
Star Trek might just become true.
ifandwhen208 4 months ago
Oh god we're fucked once again!!!
MThe3 4 months ago
If faster by only 60 nanoseconds on a 500 miles distance, it's probably only a better tuning or refinement of Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
hapi3rd 4 months ago
Any news on this? It's been over 2 weeks, have they done any more tests?
CrazyShooter199 4 months ago
@CrazyShooter199 all the scientists went back in time
3521soda 4 months ago
@CrazyShooter199
There haven't been updates because the original announcement was based on bad measurements. Their mistake was to fire off a Press Release, based on their hunger for fame rather than good science. You can use Wikipedia to read about the "N ray" embarrassment of 1903, and the "cold fusion" embarrassment of 1989, to see how this current episode fits into history. CERN is a really, really big lab -- you'll always find some donkeys in such a large mix, tarnishing the lab's name.
OtherVerse 4 months ago 14
@OtherVerse has this been confirmed or are you one of those annoying people who think their opinion is fact? No offense. If you have any, could you please give evidence?
CrazyShooter199 4 months ago
@CrazyShooter199
I get what you're saying. Unfortunately, there's no video evidence tracking my conversations. You can gauge my credibility for yourself, though, by scanning the YouTube comments under a CERNTV video titled "LHCb - The Beauty Experiment." When I pointed out huge important errors in the video, and floated the idea of meeting in person to discuss corrections, the video's producer defended his ego by quoting lines that weren't even in the video. It's quite depressing.
OtherVerse 4 months ago
@CrazyShooter199
Also, notice that this video has a description that claims "Scientists at CERN ... have discovered sub-atomic particles..." Ha ha! Anyone can Google "neutrino" to see the long history of these particles. If I claimed to make a shocking new measurement of the U.S. coastline, perhaps they'd give me credit for discovering America.
OtherVerse 4 months ago
@OtherVerse ughhh please read the WHOLE description.
CrazyShooter199 4 months ago
@CrazyShooter199
Yes, the whole description of this Euronews video is full of absurdities. I comment anonymously on YouTube, but anyone can see that Weinberg and Glashow are just two of the iconic physicists publicly criticizing the claims of the OPERA Collaboration (thanks to Google, no one needs to take my word for it).
OtherVerse 4 months ago 3
@OtherVerse perhaps, there have been no updates because it takes more than 2 months to verify claims, regardless of their magnitude
lundwed 3 months ago
@lundwed
The physicists Andrew Cohen and Sheldon Glashow (if you don't already know who Glashow is, you can look up that as well) submitted a paper on Sept 29, titled "New Constraints on Neutrino Velocities." ( PDF available at arxiv.org/abs/1109.6562 )
The abstract states: "Thus we refute the superluminal interpretation of the OPERA result. Furthermore, we appeal to [experimental] data to establish strong new limits on the superluminal propagation of high-energy neutrinos." Case closed. Done.
OtherVerse 3 months ago 8
@OtherVerse in quantum physics there s no such thing as "case closed done", remember these are all just theories not proven facts, even your hastily googled cohen-glasgow effect paper is a theory, their assumptions are not universally valid, not all models of faster-than-light neutrinos have to respect these assumptions, welcome to the weird world of quantum physics
lundwed 3 months ago
@lundwed thank you, sir.
smoki666x666 3 months ago
@OtherVerse is it possible for neutrinos to have no mass?
jvanegas14 2 months ago
@jvanegas14 No. Experimental results on "neutrino oscillations" are explained mathematically, requiring non-zero neutrino masses.
For further clarification of oscillation measurements and their implications, you can search for:
1) Super-Kamiokande
2) Sudbury Neutrino Observatory
Note that massless particles are constrained to move at exactly "c," the speed of light. The OPERA Collaboration's current superluminal delusions derive from tachyon theories, where "c" is unreachably *slow*.
OtherVerse 2 months ago
@OtherVerse what if the neutrinos travel superluminal, relative to light on earth, yet subluminal relative to light in a vacuum?
jvanegas14 2 months ago
@jvanegas14 Note that even in a non-vacuum, c is always c (photon signals merely "get hung up" in processes while traversing matter, and therefore "show up" slower than c). If you look up "Cerenkov radiation" you'll see that physicists have long understood the behavior of particles that exceed the local light propagation speed in a non-vacuum.
In brief, the OPERA Collaboration is making a very different extreme claim.
OtherVerse 2 months ago
@OtherVerse The OPERA neutrino episode was actually a very interesting affair from a number of standpoints. It was an excellent public example of how science, at its best, is conducted. The experimenters practiced excellent due diligence. And then presented their remarkable results, with proper skepticism, for discussion by the scientific community. It is also an excellent example of how even when science is being conducted at its best, the media, blogosphere, & public still get it all wrong.
sbergman27 2 months ago
@sbergman27 You shouldn't state your opinion in such dogmatic terms.
Look at the exact wording in the original CERN Press Release. Not only did it actively stoke the media misrepresentations, but it also revealed a complete misunderstanding of the nature of modern scientific progress. If an undergraduate student had submitted such a gross misunderstanding in a 'philosophy of science' class, it would have earned a failing grade.
This is a repeat of the 1903 'N ray' embarrassment.
OtherVerse 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@OtherVerse Sean Carroll disagrees: tinyurlDOTcom/3tzjg5y
Anyway, you're overlooking the fact that GSNL != CERN. GSNL did the experiment. You may as well reference Oprah Winfrey. Which demonstrates that you, like the rest of the pubic, look to the wrong places for science news. Read the paper: tinyurlDOTcom/d9uddu4
View the presentation: tinyurlDOTcom/858gywq
Show me a 1st party acting irresponsibly. I note that you tend to disagree for disagreement's sake. Thus I limit my time allotted to you.
sbergman27 2 months ago
@OtherVerse No, there haven't been updates because they hadn't published their "findings" on a peer-review based journal. It could've been published on arXiv or something.
smoki666x666 3 months ago
@smoki666x666
The OPERA claims were submitted Sept 22 (arXiv:1109.4897v1).
More importantly, Cohen and Glashow already (Sept 29) submitted a crushingly simple appeal to preexisting experimental data and well-understood particle processes to show that the OPERA claims (the "anomaly") can't stand.
Note that some OPERA Collaboration members refused to have their names associated with the initial faster-than-light claims. To say "it hasn't been published" is to say: "sloppy results are sloppy."
OtherVerse 3 months ago
@OtherVerse there it is. They published it on arXiv to maybe get some fame, but they weren't claiming it was true. They calculated the measurements and published it on arXiv instead of a peer-review journal.
smoki666x666 3 months ago
@smoki666x666 Maybe it's because submitting to arXiv is an easier and faster process than peer reviewing.
drrobertoboogie97 3 months ago
@OtherVerse One small essential detail. CERN has nothing to do with this announcement. CERN only provides a beam of neutrinos to Gran Sasso. The announcement was done by the Opera experiment, based in Italy. They are the ones who performed these measurements and came out with these findings.
May I add that they did not do exactly an announcement, but organized a conference at CERN to ask their fellows scientists to help them understand where they got it wrong, if anything.
BlackHoleRider 3 months ago
@BlackHoleRider
In fact, the CERN website clearly shows that a CERN Press Release went out on Sept 23 ("PR19.11").
Couple that with the fact that the "seminar" was webcast on CERN's webpages , and you can see that all of my comments are accurate. Some people simply prefer celebrity instead of actual stature in their field. Some people are gripped by delusion, and end up confusing the two. It's sad.
OtherVerse 3 months ago
@OtherVerse
Now it wasnt. They clearly said they didnt believe it to be true themselves and were investigating the matter
Capeau 3 months ago
@OtherVerse "Their mistake was to fire off a Press Release, based on their hunger for fame rather than good science. " that's not how it happened ?! *facepalm* you're a loud mouthed ignoramus
sausage4mash 3 months ago
c = 299 792 458 m/s. What is the accurate speed of this neutrino?
jir108ka 4 months ago
Fuck, now the 3 pages of AP physics homework are useless
112233jjooee 4 months ago
HIGHLY unlikely it will be confirmed/replicated.
csmcmillion 4 months ago
Visit (the end of science website), if you dare.
Rush6477 4 months ago