CERN goes faster than speed of light - LHC breaks "Light Barrier" with neutrinos at CERN

[zukodude487987]

They are measuring the neutrinos speed with the GPS system and the GPS is calibrated to match Einstein's theory of relativity. So you are trying to disprove relativity with Relativity

[tntodor]

The knowledge is a stairway to finding the truth. Each step is quiestioned, discussed and eventually approved or not. I think Einstein is right about that matter cannot move faster than the speed ot light, but what about the quantum particles? I won't be surprized if it turns out that the neutrinos, which arrived "faster than light" are just other neutrinos accepting the state of the fired ones. And if that is the case, this opens a vast field for the physitians! Good luck!

[kantrzyn]

firstly they should study the nature of space, what space really is, how electromagnetic waves are transported trough space. for sound waves the medium is air, for light the medium is space. If we change the properties of air, sound speed changes, why should not the speed of light (or neutrinos) change if change the properties of space. maybe they simple changed in accelerator the properties of space and light in the same condition would even faster as the neutrinos.

[MetalheadMr666]

I don't think Einstein was wrong. Nothing in nature moves faster then the speed of light. I think the only reason why the Neutrinos were moving faster than the speed of light is simply because we were accelerating them (applying a force on them). Besides Neutrinos have no mass. Perhaps that is the only reason why they could be accelerated past the speed of light.

[TheZenoEffect]

@MetalheadMr666 You could be right, it could be just as simple

as that.

[Belem809]

@MetalheadMr666 but then they are faster than light

[MetalheadMr666]

@Belem809 Well, sure i guess. I'm not an expert. QED is a bizarre reality anyway. I think it could be possible that the Neutrinos "saw" a different path around the accelerator. After all, isn't the geometry of space time relative anyway?

[JBeezie428]

@MetalheadMr666 although your logic is well thought-out, still, this discovery is bigger than you think. You are conflating terms. "Naturally" does not mean "without human intervention". We are a part of nature. Any speed we can make something go is still a "natural speed". All of modern physics is based off of e=mc2. This discovery now takes Einstein's entire theory and turns it on its head.

[MetalheadMr666]

@JBeezie428 Well that is a really good point actually. Hey I was wondering, if you are moving faster then the speed of light, is the speed of still the same in all reference frames? I suppose I could work the math myself but i'm not sure.

[JBeezie428]

@MetalheadMr666 I would guess yes. Although I am no expert and not totally sure. But I think the "light-barrier" is still very relevant with regard to vision of observers who necessarily use light to see events happen. Since at light speed, from any frame of reference, light travels at the same speed, I would guess anything going faster would also abide by that law.

[MetalheadMr666]

@JBeezie428 Vpo=(Vpo^'+Vo'o)/(1+(Vpo^' Vo'o)/c^2 )=(C+2C)/(1+(2C^2)/C^2 )=(C(1+2))/3=C

Sorry that is the best math i could do for Youtube's text box. Anyway, Yeah i think the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. What do you think?

[JBeezie428]

@MetalheadMr666 I will trust your math. When ti comes to math I am pretty much a laymen. I have a degree in Philosophy with a concentration on Philosophy of Mind and Philosophy of Science. So conceptually, the whole picture is very clear to me, but the math behind the theory is not my area of expertise! Nice stuff tho!

[TheFirstFool]

@MetalheadMr666 Einstein didn't say nothing in NATURE could travel past the speed of light. He said NOTHING PERIOD could travel beyond the speed of light. Ergo, he was wrong in this detail only. His equations and theories were fine within context. I'm sure if he were alive today he would be quite happy to admit that he hadn't taken anything like neutrinos into account. Its ok to say he was wrong. I think even Einstein would have a chuckle at his own expense.

[MetalheadMr666]

@TheFirstFool Well sure i guess you have a pretty good point. I still think that it would be a valid hypothesis to say that the neutrinos never really traveled faster than light. Rather, they took a different path around the accelerator. I guess that is assuming that space-time's geometry is relative.

[CARSONB43]

@MetalheadMr666 the have mass

[no1matt]

@MetalheadMr666 The idea of the speed of light is that its physicaly unbreakable. No matter how fast a particle is accelerated it will never pass the speed of light and nature will physicaly prevent the limit being broken

[alf22libra]

Very interesting.But first of all:Neutrinos are partners of light.The pulse of a bean of ligth is not unidimensional "geometry" .There are alternative path.and mouvements.Then.it will be strange that neutrinos should behave like charged electrons."Neutrinos faster than ligth"is a logic result that prouves that neutrinos exist and behave like neutrinos.¿Could neutrinos be coded ?

[madhat1979]

The OPERA experiment is a collaboration between CERN in Geneva, Switzerland, and the Gran Sasso laboratory in Italy.

AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LARGE HADRON COLLIDER!!!

[wxb131]

so, it follows that the "addition of velocities" formula is not correct? i think there's something wrong. as my teacher in physics told me, nothing (in the form of matter) could accelerate to exceed the velocity of light;

[CARSONB43]

All that really happened is, as the particle approached "c" the distance in front of it contracted, allowing the particle to arrive sooner. This was just to get your minds off the the Higgs boson and to pretend that LHC wasn't a waste of money.

[raider762]

einstein who cares... tesla would really know how to use it. and there is no speed limit.

[Deepmindandheartlife]

Science is highly limited. especially by numbers. im sure in other planets they've given up on trying to make things logical.

[waislandres]

Test on this next week, extra points for showing your work, good luck !

[spinkaloid]

I'm not sure that this discovery has anything to do with the LHC other than it happens at CERN. If I understand correctly the neutrinos are accelerated (as protons) in the SPS (super proton syncrotron) the machine that feeds the LHC but never enter the LHC itself.

[OneEarthSolution]

please, what a joke. i proved this 12 years ago when i was in 5th fucking grade!!!!!! we don't need billion dollar facilities to prove this. come on physicists, don't be so stupid. come on science, don't over complicate everything and make a billion steps to prove something that so obvious little is needed.

[7EVENTY6]

Didnt they prove this wrong a week later? Something wasnt taken into account when measuring the departure and arrival times. Look it up,

[TheZenoEffect]

NO!~

However... It does mean that most modern day physicists

will have have to re-examine - take their own concept of physics

into perspective.

The Universe is a vast, pervasive mystery: We must

embrace the mystery, to make real progress towards

'The Truth',

[namgyu]

does this mean i have to retake physics?

[TheZenoEffect]

@namgyu Even better - It means the PHYSICISTS will have

to to retake physics... Isn't it beautiful?

[AznMarshmallow]

"most great inventions were once thought to be impossibilities" :D

[rickyd0821]

Imagine what Einstein could do with a large Hadron Collider.

[Trisscarro]

@rickyd0821 nothing he rejected quantum physics

[alZiiHardstylez]

This would literally blow Einstein's mind.

[eliteinventor]

Tachyons

[hbz241]

sooner or later the idea of nothing faster than light will be ridiculous

[TheZenoEffect]

@hbz241 "Scientists may be in the business of laughing at their predecessors,

but owing to an array of human mental dispositions, few realize that someone will laugh at their beliefs in the future" - N. N. Taleb - The Black Swan

Science evolves, nothing is set in stone

[MrMaxendiesel]

there is also faster then light is teleport

[MrMaxendiesel]

if you go fast like speed of light you fast as time you can make you self trew time travel

[InfiniteUniverse88]

What we percieve as time is nothing more than the movement of matter/energy within 3 dimensions. There is no 4th dimension, and if there is, it's not time.

[MrMaxendiesel]

@InfiniteUniverse88 wel there is fourth dimension you know

[InfiniteUniverse88]

@MrMaxen If everything stood still, there would be no time, but there would still be 3 dimensions. When all the little pieces move relative to each other, we percieve that as time. There's nothing special in the way those pieces move, no order, no synchronized direction. Rather the little pieces move chaotically in all directions within 3 dimensions. A fourth dimension just isn't necessary to explain our perception of movement, which we understand as time.

[MrMaxendiesel]

@InfiniteUniverse88 oke have learn today something

[basstemperature]

Is not LHC who have braking the speed light -__- go die

[VNCH001]

Faster than light has been predicted in The Theory Of Invariance:

youtube.com/watch?v=IJAqw8MRD0­Q

[goldeena11]

but if they received the neutrinos faster than light got there, then wouldn't they have traveled back in time slightly at the exact point in time that the neutrinos we're detected, in fact - did we all not then travel back in time, perhaps a trillionth of a second so that we didn't even notice? have they checked the records on those massively accurate clocks yet??

[Eleglas]

@goldeena11 I honestly can't answer that. This is what they are checking. If this has happened, all of our understanding of Physics will have to be rewritten. It's a massive game changer. And I for one could not be happier. Because if it is true, then faster than light travel is possible, which means Intergalactic travel is also possible! Which means, Gene Roddenberry will get right what Einstein got wrong!

[grant11102]

Guys just ignore **lgadwords**

He is a troll !!!!

Never feed a troll!!! ignore and it will move on.

[lolgepwnt]

Also, as it appears to me anyway, the real WMD is the modern assault rifle.

[lgadwords]

Ya... always knew that dumb jew was wrong all along. Now it's finally proven.

[lolgepwnt]

@lgadwords

That "dumb jew" you speak of is responsible for a vast chunk of modern technology.

Prick.

[lgadwords]

@lolgepwnt you mean the modern technology that killed thousands of lives?

[lolgepwnt]

@lgadwords

Yes. The discoveries of Einstein allowed for knowledge to be focused to destructive ends.

But his goal wasn't to create a WMD. That was the decision of the American government of the time.

[lgadwords]

@lolgepwnt not only american governments, but european and now the entire world has it, yet there's still no peace and never will be son long as there are WMD's we've been at war ever since. What peace?

[Kenshiroit]

@lgadwords there was peace before wmd? how comes we got WWII? or WWI? or all the previous wars? Actually there was a war per year...wow talk about peace.

[lolgepwnt]

@lgadwords

I disagree. While the consequences of WMD usage are severe, the threat of countries actually going to war and using them (US vs Russia for example) is negligible.

Early warning technology means neither country has an incentive to use them as the other country will detect the launch and retaliate. The result is that both countries are decimated and neither country "wins".

It's portable WMDs used by individual groups (i.e. non state-sponsored terrorists) that are the main threat.

[lolgepwnt]

@lgadwords

But viable fissionable material is hard to process and in all likelihood just as hard to keep secret.

Which doesn't mean it can't happen, just that it is very unlikely - especially once multiple layers of intelligence gathering and policing are included.

Since Einstein's work has other, more humanitarian, consequences the best situation to be in is all countries have nukes and all countries understand what the responses of all other countries will be should they be used.

[lgadwords]

@lolgepwnt Einstein himself regret having told the President of this discovery, why? because he knew the potential disaster it could lead to. Yes it's a deterrent but at what cost... it's conceivable that eventually someone if not Einstein would discover it but they didn't. He was the one that discovered and even supported the building of a nuclear device. So by your logic every citizen should bear arms and there would be no crime?

[lolgepwnt]

@lgadwords

Einstein informed the president in a signed letter that if the Germans were indeed building a nuclear weapon, then it was prudent that America should also.

But I have no doubt that it would have been built anyway as a way to win the war.

And no, arming a population isn't compatible with a nuclear weapons standoff.

And, if you are actually interested, this very topic is a cornerstone of any university level economics course on game theory. Google for more information.

[NIKisMEEEE]

@lgadwords Hey, Buddy, think about this. A tree falls on your car. Do you blame Sir. Issac Newton for explaining the laws that govern the incident? No, you blame the wind that blew over the tree. A nuclear weapon is produced. Do you blame the man who thought of the principals on which the weapon functions? No. You blame the people who actually MADE the bomb.

[lgadwords]

@NIKisMEEEE Terrible analogies... but I'll rebut nonetheless. He didn't just "thought of the principals", he actually layed the foundation for the development and encouraged it to be built. That is why he regret doing it. Learn your history and educate yourself "buddy".

[Kenshiroit]

@lgadwords tell me what tech modern or ancient didnt kill tousand of lives....

[lgadwords]

@Kenshiroit Sure, but not on the scale of the atom bomb.

[Kenshiroit]

@lgadwords actually the atom bomb gave us almost '70y of peace...

[lgadwords]

@Kenshiroit Really, who's "us"... do you see world peace at this moment in time? is the world a safer place because of nuclear technology?

[Kenshiroit]

@lgadwords I will say yes, it is much more safer than 1917. Actually I will also say, that nukes prevented the NATO vs USSR war. So yes nukes make the world safer :-)

[TheZenoEffect]

@lolgepwnt Yeah, leave the Jewes alone. I'm NO FAN of Israel,

or Zionist scum that infest the U.S. gov. that control foreign policy

but leave the 'Jew' bullshit to the shit-eaters...

Einstein was a great man, though, by his own admission, never

saw the 'Big Picture'. That doesn't denigrate from his other

accomplishments.

[GloomWalkersTOR]

Ok, they didnt DISCOVER those particles, they simply measured them. 

[vstijn]

If proven it does not blow Einstein's theory out of the water. Time is relative and as the speed of light is measured in distance to time it makes it relative or inaccurate. If you move in a spaceship from earth with the speed of light, the headlight its light will move with the speed of light thats twice the speed of light from earths view.

[lolgepwnt]

@vstijn

Nope.

[sportsfreak78]

@vstijn that is actually 100% the opposite of what einstein said

[audryzas]

@Pepperdog12 oh please stfu with the mayans already

[skydome29]

Only two things matter; 1) that if the neutrinos speed is in fact faster than light, our view of classical physics, especially light, needs a large over haul. 2) that the experiment was done correctly, and the 60 nanoseconds is indeed beyond the margin of error. If only Feynman could have heard this!

[james95121]

It is small , but in cosmology scales it's a huge difference

[JamesEtallaz]

60 nanoseconds faster than light...that's a very small difference. Hope it's true though :-)