@Themayseffect there is no light "in general". the visible spectrum still moves at C. the difference you are inquiring about is a result of the wavelength and the frequency, the speed is constant.
@TheJasmineee anything traveling faster than light should actually move backwards through time. So, the bartender was able to tell the neutrino that he wouldn't get served, before the neutrino walked into the bar... lame time-travel joke
@TheJasmineee It's a simple pun, really. The popular theory is that time stops at the speed of light, and reverses when you exceed it. Since neutrinos are apparently faster than the speed of light, they're always going back in time...
@TheTopLogician Impartially speaking as a physicist, etc I say...
Based upon physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic your comment is 100% directly & indirectly incorrect. It's a well known fact Neutrinos v is faster than c (or, FTL = faster than light) also via the experiment by Dr Lijun Wang the v of a Photon traveled 300 times faster than the normal v/c & via its v it naturally didn't travel backwards in time which will violate the multiverse, the 3rd law of motion etc
There was a consensus in the scientific community, not too long ago, that the speed of sound was the fastest possible speed .... so who knows how fast things can get.
@soulsfang No, actually I meant the speed of sound. "Not too long ago" is a subjective phrase, remember that when you read this part, because in the light of how long our species existed, it was the speed "barrier" that had the longest fascination with the strongest consensus. The speed of light has a consensus yes, but there are many scientists who believe it can be exceeded and that we just don't know how yet. ;)
@adaeyes firstly I know nothing :-) but it seems to me the more complex and the more particles everything seems wrong. simplness is perfection, and from my own watching of the news, physics seems to be just making up magic particles all the time. it seems a bit like telling a lie, and adding more and more lies to explain the first.
@mPky1 These are theoretical particles that they're looking for, they're not just making these up, they got these theories from the math, the lhc was built to look for these.
@TheBaldchipmunk actually al these particles are not perfextly oor completely accounted for, hence the need for thehiggs to account for the weight, which seems like a major thing in the system.
@0hfuzzyu No. Devices are used that time-stamp as the particle hits the detector. I can assure you, everyone in any measurement field (aviation engine parts repair for me) knows full well the delay in computer processing time, and what is needed to get an actual measurement.
@Exmech2 What time stamp can possibly compete with any accuracy against the speed of light? Name one. I design time stamps into systems all the time. I am an embedded systems engineer with 30 years experience. Gee you said you were an astronaut. I guess that was to bait me right? God what a mindless slug. Not a wonder you are in repair. Hey it's a noble craft. I was a electronics tech long before I started designing systems and I have worked on Ultrasound, Electron beam microscopes, etc.
@photopicker LoL!! Your feeble attempts at appeal to authority amuse me greatly. I'm an astronaut too, one who works wonders with Labview, but an astronaut nonetheless. I see you're an astronaut too. One that cultishly believes that UFO's are aliens.
Now I know you're going to say something so stupid that will merely confirm Poe's law. Come on... you can say it...
@Exmech2 Hardly an astronaut mate. I am an engineer and have spent the last 25 years researching and training in phenomenon. Not all UFO's can be classified as extra-terrestrial. Shermers hub cap for instance, and digital manipulation. But I can assure you when you see a real lighter fly over head it isn't anything that has ever been seen from the ranks of aviation that's for sure. Particularly since these fields are energetic and have no tangible physical form. But hey you are the expert here.
@Exmech2 Do you have an answer in regards to time stamping particles that are accelerated at outrageous velocities? I've designed discrete measurement systems for several companies including HP and as far as I remember there really isn't logic that can capture transitions in the low to mid microwave range let alone infrared, visible, ultraviolet, and well on into gamma rays. It would be interesting to see what Cern is using for hardware though. Times change.
Hey ...my " Uncle " was Detlev Wulf Bronk ( From MJ-12)...and my mom was working under his virology program at John Hopkins University when she was pregnant with me....I never met my father....and more...heh heh heh....come to the website lunatic outpost and look for !saac.....I have some " truth " for you.....I am Grigori Yitshak, fallen from the House of David.
@lakloplak i dont think so,i'. sure they analysed every single posible thing that could have caused them go faster and this would be the one of the first reasons :)
What if a neutrino going approx the speed of light, and a ghost particle (negative kinetic energy) going approx the speed of light collided? Wouldn't there be a large amount of velocity change?
My belief is that they had nothing real to show for themselves for running the LHC all this while and so they were very quick to jump on this, far quicker than a scientist ought to be, because they were desperate to justify their little money-waster's existence.
@medexamtoolsdotcom Not proving something is just as important as proving something. If the mathematical model predicts certain particles should exist/be detected above a certain evergy level, and they don't appear in experiments, then they know that mathematical model needs to be changed, there is something in the model that has not been thought of yet.
@MadManMarkAu "Yes, and for my next parlor trick, I shan't make anything appear!" I'm sorry, but not finding something is a really lousy way to do science. I mean, of course, like all observations, it provides information. But very, very little. It's not like the Michelson-Morley experiment where they failed to find a nonzero "ether" velocity, this would be looking for a very specific thing and not finding it. They don't know all the possibilities, so elimination is a bad method.
@medexamtoolsdotcom You have a valid point, and I can agree with it; it is better to directly look for something than to elimenate all other possiblities and infer its existance. Although the LHC did not conclusively find the Higgs Boson, the data they have acquired from the experiments run on it has given us plenty to think about (e.g. faster than light neutrinos). I'm still not ruling out the possiblity of the higgs being observed. We'll see later this year if they find it.
Please look up Eugene Sittampalam. He has broken down E=mc^2 into first principles for the very first time in history where he shows that the speed of c is not a constant. He was featured in Discovery Magazine in April 2002 and Infinite Energy (Issue 53) in 2004 with a two page editorial by the late Eugene Mallove (who left MIT at Harvard in '89 in protest to his colleges fuging their cold fusion experiments). sittampalam. net/Synopsis. htm and follow my channel for upcoming animations. Bless!
@lypse14 why so big mun? He explains that gravity pushes us down rather than some mystical energy pulling us down. And, among others, that it is a fractal universe we live in which you find evident in binary and trinary star systems. They bifurcate from a larger star through super novas; and that stars themselves originate from the galactic core (hub) where they are (the new born stars) spat out into spiral arms (similar to water spinning out of a spinning sprinkler. And :p out of space..lol
@HellsingDemon According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, if you travel faster than light, you could send a signal that arrives before you even sent it. The neutrino is receiving a reply before even arriving to the bar because it travelled faster than light.
Even if we did send neutrinos back in time, maybe the explanation as to why we havent come in contact with the future is that only neutrinos have been sent back in time and not information/people. This means that there could be particles from the future frame, we just don't know it. Or it could be the fact that we havent reached the date where future humans went back in time yet. Could we say that those neutrinos we fired went to the past by a fraction of a second? Amazing. Sounds weird right?
Im skeptical about this, for YEARS scientists in Sweden have had particles travel at 99.999999...% of the speed of light and they have not been able to reach it, and through careful measurement, have found that those particles are moving slower through time than the world around them. So according to a theory by Steven Hawkings, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to go at or above the speed of light. He then goes on about time travel but thats beside the point
Do the scientists here actually read these comments? I may have an explanation for the faster than light results... My explanation would be on the order of 10^-5 or 10^-6… It would take into account the SN1987 supernova results, too…
@justsoundtechno - I think it arives "before we can see it" - at the same level as you can travel faster than sound, thus making you "arive before you can hear it".
And reality smacks the world across the face with a true probability of PRECOGNITION. The crazy part is i suggested this 5 years ago. That these would most likely be in the gamma frequency, as Mytochondrial DNA have a tale to tell. Infact, most scheptics should have gotten their heads out of their asses the moment EM fields proved the bending of time.
So it means like when you have a piece of paper, and earth is on the left side and saturn for example on the right side, you can fold the paper? and that you create some sort of hole? Does this mean that the SETI project becomes not usefull anymore, because now we can send signals that go faster then the speed of light... howfast is it then? like howlong does it take to that WOW! Signal 200 lightyears further?
@okuma0kuma light has always had mass the textbooks and textbook bound scholars just say they don't. Just like insane wave theorists lol. Btw I doubt neutrinos are light or faster than light. Lol I should publish my lunatic ideas soon I guess and just let people ponder and whatever.
I really don't understand how this could happen. S=(1-v^2/c^2) , if a particle would be able to go fast then space-time dilation would be negative. Einstein's theories accurately address particles going near the speed of light, but if this is true we'd have to come up with a new set of rules. Exciting!
there will be more things to talk about . We find those things ( neutrino,....) in our mily way and few othes. but what we don't know is the atoms , in those other billions milky way.
@motionapplied yeah, just keep embarrassing yourself, you're already hundreds of feet down into your whole, soon you'll be at the same level as Faux News!
@motionapplied Why is it that people on YouTube immediately jump to Nazi comparisons the minute they are proven to be wrong? Godwin's Law, that is why.
Could be worse. I could've been compared to a person who is proud to be an American these days.
Anyway, thank you for proving my initial point about YouTube comments. You really are a fine specimen of the lowest vermin of the Internet: YouTube trolls.
@motionapplied Oh that's pretty rich, the guy who is presenting judgement over the comments of others (most of them you didn't even read) is calling ME limited in the mind!
LIVERPOOL ARE GOING TO WIN THE LEAGUE!!! Not this season, but within Steven Gerrards era. By the way. I like persons who likes Liverpool more than other people :)
The neutrinos are very unlikely to interact with any sort of particles due to it's lack of charges, and particles in the vacuum would not hinder/refract it's trajectory. Even though, by stating that there could be small amount of particles still within the vacuum that could hinder a photons directly, seems negligible, the measurement itself was very precise (to the nanometer) leading myself to think that accounting for such measures is logical.
(the photons may still be going at the speed of light while bumping into such a small amount of particles/different medium, thus distorting the speed as a whole. Example: If you have to flashlights, and you shine, simultaneously, one of them with the air as the medium and the other with glass as the medium, the one traveling through air would reach an indicated destination before the other.)
Light travels at speed of "c" universally, however, the path may distorted by the common phenomenon known as refraction. Now, if photons and neutrinos were placed inside the (vacuumed) Large Hadron Collider, we should expect light to win the race. However, even though the circuit is "vacuumed," this doesn't necessarily mean that there's "nothing" there. That "something" may be particles of some sort that may serve to hinder the pathway of the photon....
Could a simple explanation of this experiment be that our human measurements of the speed of light are slightly wrong and the actual cosmic speed limit (the speed of light in vacuum) is slightly higher than we thought? Light does slow down when it passes through materials. Ambient space is not a complete vacuum, so maybe the "real" speed of light of slightly higher than thought. Neutrinos barley interact with anything, so maybe they can travel at that slightly higher "real" speed of light.
Back in the 70's the entity SETH described how science will continue to build instruments to find smaller and smaller units without realizing that we are translating the real NONPHYSICAL thing into terms of what we're looking for; "Each particleized unit of consciousness contains within it inherently the knowledge of all other such particles— for at other levels, again, the units are operating as waves. Basically the units move FASTER THAN LIGHT, slowing down, in your terms, to form matter."
I would be asking more about this time paradox, I don't really see how this causes a time issue. If they go >C then they do and the spectrum goes a bit further then we thought and time is dependent on where the object its relative to sits in the spectrum as the limit. we should know if T is violated surely, the energy level and decay of the partial, if being >C violates time they should never decay /evolve & interaction should occur before the particle is there. how fast are tachyons?
@tasilbhurn if you know so much about particle physics what the hell are you doing on youtube postin comments ?? should'nt you be debateing this elsewhere..like CERN for instance or maybe just your local uni !!
@milton1969able why not? :) i like to debate and ask questions. I was asking questions about this and saying what questions I would be asking about this result. But mainly I honestly dont see why the supprise, to be honest thats what I would expect to see, but I'm not a prof and have many gaps in my knowledge on the subject, but it still seems to me that it would make sense. What do you think? you dont need to be a genius, a prof, einstein or anything to have an opinion and ideas on your own.
@tasilbhurn not only was this found to be a technical fault.
there are many ways to proove that it violates time but, as a meager first year physicist, lorentz contractions is how the speed you travel at in reference to a plane affects your time, length, speed to an observer on the plane. one formula is t=(gamma)(t0), t=observed time, t0=real time and gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2). lets say the v is 2c, gamma=-(1/sqrt(3))i. this goes into imaginary numbers where gamma needs to be a real value
@ieatpeople4breakfast ok, a few things. Where does it say there was a technical fault? the experiment was agreed to be re-run on the 28th of October. and in that time, they re-ran the experiment, analyzed the results, published and then you come to hear about it. that is the quickest that the science community has EVER moved WELL DONE! your half-explanation still doesn't explain the questions i was asking. could you be clearer and to be honest, i think you missed the point why i asked questions.
@tasilbhurn my lecturers claimed there was a technical fault.... calm down, they have they're contacts.
and sorry i cant be of more help... i have only just started uni.
and my 'half explanation' summing up what i did in 7 hours of lectures on this topic in 500 characters does, funnily enough, answer your question- you cannot travel at 3i m/s.
dont be so fucking rude, i was only trying to help
@ieatpeople4breakfast i think you'll find that for a while the idea of it being a fault was the most popular theory to explain it. but when you add all the error margins together it still doesnt match the differance in time.
I wasnt being "fucking rude" i was being humerous. (and poor at spelling)
the proof that neutrinos arent faster than the speed of light is that at the end he promised to go back in time and delete this video so if this video exists then neutrinos arent faster than light :D either that or he doesnt keep his promises
@bipbop4232 im pretty sure the physicist studying it for 3 years at Gran would have already thought of that ... They found they errors so they are others for help
Surely it's possible to travel faster than light. If you are driving at 100 mp/h in one direction, and a car is passing you at 100 mp/h, then the car is actually passing you at 200 mp/h. If a photon is traveling at 186,000 mp/s in one direction, and a photon passes it in the other direction going the same speed, then the photon is actually passing the other photon at twice the speed of light.
@666drumreaper666 It doesn't really matter what it looks like though, I mean.. it simply isn't going twice the speed of light, that's what I'm saying.
@666drumreaper666 that's the trick. No matter from what perspective you are, light is always at the speed as stated by einstein. It's confusing but it's the basic principle of relativity.
@esdjiraan yeah thats a good point still you never know we have come along way from thinking the earth is flat although i think your right im just saying
If neutrinos can pass through all objects, then how can the researchers differentiate between the neutrino they seen at cern and a random neutrino which while passing through the earth happened to be detected in Italy.
i thought that if the neutrinos are faster then light then wouldnt they have existed before the expansion of the universe. just guessing, Not a physicist. soz if wrong
may i throw in an question.. is it faster the the speed light> in the visible light spectrum. or light in general.
Themayseffect 19 hours ago
@Themayseffect there is no light "in general". the visible spectrum still moves at C. the difference you are inquiring about is a result of the wavelength and the frequency, the speed is constant.
archanfel650 15 hours ago
Just a random thought, but maybe if something goes faster then the speed of light it turns into anti-matter/dark-matter?
neoman121 1 day ago
I take it I'm the only person that found it funny..
ColostomyCake 1 day ago
I knew something was wrong. Turns out it was.
redshift40 1 week ago
debunked as an error TODAY,
bign3ck 1 week ago 2
@bign3ck Where did you get this?
Gytax0 5 days ago
Oops! dodgy fibre optic connection between gps and computer.
EmmittBrownBTTF1 1 week ago
It turns out neutrinos does not move faster than light after all according to a recent news update.
cyprezz 1 week ago
Can someone please explain the joke to me?
TheJasmineee 2 weeks ago 13
@TheJasmineee anything traveling faster than light should actually move backwards through time. So, the bartender was able to tell the neutrino that he wouldn't get served, before the neutrino walked into the bar... lame time-travel joke
RandyJ007 2 weeks ago
@RandyJ007 Ahahah, thank you!
TheJasmineee 1 week ago
@TheJasmineee It's a simple pun, really. The popular theory is that time stops at the speed of light, and reverses when you exceed it. Since neutrinos are apparently faster than the speed of light, they're always going back in time...
TheTopLogician 1 week ago
@TheTopLogician Impartially speaking as a physicist, etc I say...
Based upon physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic your comment is 100% directly & indirectly incorrect. It's a well known fact Neutrinos v is faster than c (or, FTL = faster than light) also via the experiment by Dr Lijun Wang the v of a Photon traveled 300 times faster than the normal v/c & via its v it naturally didn't travel backwards in time which will violate the multiverse, the 3rd law of motion etc
Entrepreneur101 1 day ago
@TheJasmineee If you mean the second joke near the end, it's actually a very bad one. The logic is reversed.
TheTopLogician 1 week ago
There was a consensus in the scientific community, not too long ago, that the speed of sound was the fastest possible speed .... so who knows how fast things can get.
KittenKoder 2 weeks ago
@KittenKoder you sure you didn't mean speed of light? cuz weve been breaking the sound barrier for a long while now
soulsfang 2 weeks ago
@soulsfang No, actually I meant the speed of sound. "Not too long ago" is a subjective phrase, remember that when you read this part, because in the light of how long our species existed, it was the speed "barrier" that had the longest fascination with the strongest consensus. The speed of light has a consensus yes, but there are many scientists who believe it can be exceeded and that we just don't know how yet. ;)
KittenKoder 2 weeks ago
Very interesting.....but what i don't get is if this man completely relaxes his face, you can still see his teeth......?!? This is groundbreaking.
awanniexx 3 weeks ago
@adaeyes firstly I know nothing :-) but it seems to me the more complex and the more particles everything seems wrong. simplness is perfection, and from my own watching of the news, physics seems to be just making up magic particles all the time. it seems a bit like telling a lie, and adding more and more lies to explain the first.
mPky1 3 weeks ago
@mPky1 These are theoretical particles that they're looking for, they're not just making these up, they got these theories from the math, the lhc was built to look for these.
TheBaldchipmunk 3 weeks ago
@TheBaldchipmunk actually al these particles are not perfextly oor completely accounted for, hence the need for thehiggs to account for the weight, which seems like a major thing in the system.
mPky1 3 weeks ago
@sixtysymbols sorry for an ignoramus question, but how can they tell the clocks are in sync and there is no measurement or sy chronization error?
mPky1 3 weeks ago
Yeah, I'm an astronaut too, and I rob banks as a side job. Don't tell NASA I said that.
ClamCrunchy 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
tejjaw 3 weeks ago
could those nanoseconds be accounted for by the time it took for the electrons on the computer to move?
0hfuzzyu 3 weeks ago
@0hfuzzyu same question here
gulloogtg 3 weeks ago
@gulloogtg they prob. accounted for that.
SkooledINC 3 weeks ago
@0hfuzzyu No. Devices are used that time-stamp as the particle hits the detector. I can assure you, everyone in any measurement field (aviation engine parts repair for me) knows full well the delay in computer processing time, and what is needed to get an actual measurement.
Exmech2 3 weeks ago
@Exmech2 What time stamp can possibly compete with any accuracy against the speed of light? Name one. I design time stamps into systems all the time. I am an embedded systems engineer with 30 years experience. Gee you said you were an astronaut. I guess that was to bait me right? God what a mindless slug. Not a wonder you are in repair. Hey it's a noble craft. I was a electronics tech long before I started designing systems and I have worked on Ultrasound, Electron beam microscopes, etc.
photopicker 3 weeks ago
@photopicker LoL!! Your feeble attempts at appeal to authority amuse me greatly. I'm an astronaut too, one who works wonders with Labview, but an astronaut nonetheless. I see you're an astronaut too. One that cultishly believes that UFO's are aliens.
Now I know you're going to say something so stupid that will merely confirm Poe's law. Come on... you can say it...
Exmech2 3 weeks ago
@Exmech2 Did astronaut become a synonym for idiots fighting over the internet when I wasn't looking?
23Sirus23 3 weeks ago
@23Sirus23 Fighting? With a ufo twit? LMAO! You must be an astronaut too.
Exmech2 3 weeks ago
@Exmech2 Hardly an astronaut mate. I am an engineer and have spent the last 25 years researching and training in phenomenon. Not all UFO's can be classified as extra-terrestrial. Shermers hub cap for instance, and digital manipulation. But I can assure you when you see a real lighter fly over head it isn't anything that has ever been seen from the ranks of aviation that's for sure. Particularly since these fields are energetic and have no tangible physical form. But hey you are the expert here.
photopicker 3 weeks ago
@photopicker Wow... pretty obsessive for an astronaut. But not for a typical ignorant and credulous ufo twit.
Exmech2 3 weeks ago
@Exmech2 Do you have an answer in regards to time stamping particles that are accelerated at outrageous velocities? I've designed discrete measurement systems for several companies including HP and as far as I remember there really isn't logic that can capture transitions in the low to mid microwave range let alone infrared, visible, ultraviolet, and well on into gamma rays. It would be interesting to see what Cern is using for hardware though. Times change.
photopicker 3 weeks ago
@photopicker You're an aspie, aren't you? Come on... you can admit it.
Exmech2 3 weeks ago
Probably a stupid question. But is it at all possible that photons have a non-zero rest mass these Neutrinos happen to have a smaller rest mass?
kandtell 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey ...my " Uncle " was Detlev Wulf Bronk ( From MJ-12)...and my mom was working under his virology program at John Hopkins University when she was pregnant with me....I never met my father....and more...heh heh heh....come to the website lunatic outpost and look for !saac.....I have some " truth " for you.....I am Grigori Yitshak, fallen from the House of David.
1isaacmusic 4 weeks ago
Isn't it the earths rotation which caused the neutrino's to fly through faster?
lakloplak 4 weeks ago
@lakloplak i dont think so,i'. sure they analysed every single posible thing that could have caused them go faster and this would be the one of the first reasons :)
mojololo11 4 weeks ago
you have all heard it, they do not exist, otherwise the video wouln't exist
XD
megamixmovies 1 month ago
That ending joke was amazing. :P
Phlippieskezer 1 month ago
Comment removed
darketernal3 1 month ago
I thought they found a particle that went 4x the speed of light years ago?
wesmatron 1 month ago
but if you went back in time they we'd never have seen the video in the first place. lol.
coldlogic1 1 month ago
We may have got the speed of light wrong
JullianChannel 1 month ago
@JullianChannel That wouldn't explain the speed difference between the neutrino and the light particles.
Madghaar 1 month ago
@JullianChannel No, many tests have shown exactly the same result.
AllNamesWereOccupied 1 month ago
What if a neutrino going approx the speed of light, and a ghost particle (negative kinetic energy) going approx the speed of light collided? Wouldn't there be a large amount of velocity change?
TheCaphits 1 month ago
@TheCaphits Neutrinos are called ghost particles.
AllNamesWereOccupied 1 month ago
My belief is that they had nothing real to show for themselves for running the LHC all this while and so they were very quick to jump on this, far quicker than a scientist ought to be, because they were desperate to justify their little money-waster's existence.
medexamtoolsdotcom 1 month ago
@medexamtoolsdotcom Not proving something is just as important as proving something. If the mathematical model predicts certain particles should exist/be detected above a certain evergy level, and they don't appear in experiments, then they know that mathematical model needs to be changed, there is something in the model that has not been thought of yet.
MadManMarkAu 1 month ago
@MadManMarkAu "Yes, and for my next parlor trick, I shan't make anything appear!" I'm sorry, but not finding something is a really lousy way to do science. I mean, of course, like all observations, it provides information. But very, very little. It's not like the Michelson-Morley experiment where they failed to find a nonzero "ether" velocity, this would be looking for a very specific thing and not finding it. They don't know all the possibilities, so elimination is a bad method.
medexamtoolsdotcom 1 month ago
@medexamtoolsdotcom You have a valid point, and I can agree with it; it is better to directly look for something than to elimenate all other possiblities and infer its existance. Although the LHC did not conclusively find the Higgs Boson, the data they have acquired from the experiments run on it has given us plenty to think about (e.g. faster than light neutrinos). I'm still not ruling out the possiblity of the higgs being observed. We'll see later this year if they find it.
MadManMarkAu 1 month ago
They should have announced the results on Fox News if they weren't that sure about them.
MindCrazedBanjo 1 month ago
"The neutrinos... are mutating " Says the film 2012. *sigh*.
1pnoe 1 month ago
@1pnoe I stopped watching that piece of crap right there and the.
N3m3cis 1 month ago
Physics is like a play in a Theater, once you see it you work out every characters life from birth to death only by seeing it.
PanzarMetal 1 month ago
Please look up Eugene Sittampalam. He has broken down E=mc^2 into first principles for the very first time in history where he shows that the speed of c is not a constant. He was featured in Discovery Magazine in April 2002 and Infinite Energy (Issue 53) in 2004 with a two page editorial by the late Eugene Mallove (who left MIT at Harvard in '89 in protest to his colleges fuging their cold fusion experiments). sittampalam. net/Synopsis. htm and follow my channel for upcoming animations. Bless!
Pacmun 1 month ago
@Pacmun lol sittampalam is a joke dude, he knows it too haha
lypse14 1 month ago in playlist More videos from sixtysymbols
@lypse14 why so big mun? He explains that gravity pushes us down rather than some mystical energy pulling us down. And, among others, that it is a fractal universe we live in which you find evident in binary and trinary star systems. They bifurcate from a larger star through super novas; and that stars themselves originate from the galactic core (hub) where they are (the new born stars) spat out into spiral arms (similar to water spinning out of a spinning sprinkler. And :p out of space..lol
Pacmun 1 month ago
I hate the fact that there might be a 'cosmic speed limit'
I would love to have millions of particles that have the ability to travel much faster than light. :P
Poopdahoop 1 month ago
*It might have
Redflowers9 1 month ago
Can someone explain the joke to me he says at the end?
Bartender: "We don't serve neutrinos here."
"A neutrino walks into the bar"
HellsingDemon 1 month ago
@HellsingDemon I'm assuming it has something to do with time travel?
HellsingDemon 1 month ago
@HellsingDemon According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, if you travel faster than light, you could send a signal that arrives before you even sent it. The neutrino is receiving a reply before even arriving to the bar because it travelled faster than light.
AveratisArmada 1 month ago
@AveratisArmada lol! Thanks
HellsingDemon 1 month ago
Even if we did send neutrinos back in time, maybe the explanation as to why we havent come in contact with the future is that only neutrinos have been sent back in time and not information/people. This means that there could be particles from the future frame, we just don't know it. Or it could be the fact that we havent reached the date where future humans went back in time yet. Could we say that those neutrinos we fired went to the past by a fraction of a second? Amazing. Sounds weird right?
vodkacannon 1 month ago
Im skeptical about this, for YEARS scientists in Sweden have had particles travel at 99.999999...% of the speed of light and they have not been able to reach it, and through careful measurement, have found that those particles are moving slower through time than the world around them. So according to a theory by Steven Hawkings, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to go at or above the speed of light. He then goes on about time travel but thats beside the point
legorex630 1 month ago
Further:
This explanation could be verified using particles other than neutrinos and probably would not threaten Einstein…
apeek7 1 month ago
Do the scientists here actually read these comments? I may have an explanation for the faster than light results... My explanation would be on the order of 10^-5 or 10^-6… It would take into account the SN1987 supernova results, too…
apeek7 1 month ago
watch out! we have a badass particle here.
MidnightRedemption 1 month ago 8
is neutrinos the smallest particle ever know to man? it is smaller than quark?
help
adaeyes 1 month ago
@motionapplied you sound like a nazi now here.
VarykGerai 1 month ago
I didn't get the joke.
Glympse2k7 2 months ago
@Glympse2k7 the joke is that the neutrino was travelling faster than the speed of light, so it would appear in the bar after it actually arrived
justsoundtechno 1 month ago
@justsoundtechno - I think it arives "before we can see it" - at the same level as you can travel faster than sound, thus making you "arive before you can hear it".
Knaragus 1 month ago
And reality smacks the world across the face with a true probability of PRECOGNITION. The crazy part is i suggested this 5 years ago. That these would most likely be in the gamma frequency, as Mytochondrial DNA have a tale to tell. Infact, most scheptics should have gotten their heads out of their asses the moment EM fields proved the bending of time.
LendMeYourHand 2 months ago
australia got a mention :D
JMMathieson 2 months ago
9:33 i'm watching it from an other dimension
intermaniax1 2 months ago
Total bullshit. Neutrinos do not go faster than the speed of light. It's simply experimental error. Don't believe the hype. Nothing to see here.
TheTrollBrotherHood 2 months ago
@TheTrollBrotherHood it'd would be immensely more effective to troll of it's is not in you're name.
Trisscarro 2 months ago
@Trisscarro Your*
TheTrollBrotherHood 2 months ago
Comment removed
bluedice2012 1 month ago
I was just singing a song about neutrinos
cutiepie316289 2 months ago
I doubt neutrinos are lighter*
CodePython 2 months ago
So it means like when you have a piece of paper, and earth is on the left side and saturn for example on the right side, you can fold the paper? and that you create some sort of hole? Does this mean that the SETI project becomes not usefull anymore, because now we can send signals that go faster then the speed of light... howfast is it then? like howlong does it take to that WOW! Signal 200 lightyears further?
OnbekendGHC 2 months ago
if true it means light has mass !
okuma0kuma 2 months ago
@okuma0kuma light has always had mass the textbooks and textbook bound scholars just say they don't. Just like insane wave theorists lol. Btw I doubt neutrinos are light or faster than light. Lol I should publish my lunatic ideas soon I guess and just let people ponder and whatever.
CodePython 2 months ago
@CodePython ^ ^ agreed
okuma0kuma 2 months ago
thry have the best job ever
sit back and think and get paid
elflordbob1 2 months ago
Now that they made this great discovery the greatest minds in Europe can focus on an equally important technology...braces.
TrillionBuks 2 months ago
Now we finally have a chance to travel faster than light with these particles.
AlphaDelta500 2 months ago
@AlphaDelta500 neutrinos just pass through normal matter, so how is that ever gonna happen?
Meb8Rappa 2 months ago
These people got horrible teeth
markxxx21 2 months ago
@markxxx21 no one likes america
TurKdiRty 2 months ago
I really don't understand how this could happen. S=(1-v^2/c^2) , if a particle would be able to go fast then space-time dilation would be negative. Einstein's theories accurately address particles going near the speed of light, but if this is true we'd have to come up with a new set of rules. Exciting!
TheLamboGuy101 2 months ago
there will be more things to talk about . We find those things ( neutrino,....) in our mily way and few othes. but what we don't know is the atoms , in those other billions milky way.
iTechRevolutionTV 2 months ago
Leaps through higher non-time dimension. I bet it's that.
ArtypNk 2 months ago
@motionapplied yeah, just keep embarrassing yourself, you're already hundreds of feet down into your whole, soon you'll be at the same level as Faux News!
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
@Clarinerd617 sorry, "hole".
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
@motionapplied Why is it that people on YouTube immediately jump to Nazi comparisons the minute they are proven to be wrong? Godwin's Law, that is why.
Could be worse. I could've been compared to a person who is proud to be an American these days.
Anyway, thank you for proving my initial point about YouTube comments. You really are a fine specimen of the lowest vermin of the Internet: YouTube trolls.
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
@motionapplied Oh that's pretty rich, the guy who is presenting judgement over the comments of others (most of them you didn't even read) is calling ME limited in the mind!
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
@motionapplied exactly what it says on the tin.
Even uncyclopedia is more trustworthy than this site's comment sections.
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
time to build a neutrino engine :) some how, I want to leave our solar system!
kevinFahring1324 2 months ago
@motionapplied ...........you're asking YouTube, of all places?
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
If this is true then why haven't we gotten any message from the future..ohh wait maybe we have.
naksituruki 2 months ago
So... is this claiming that E=MC^2 is wrong?!
smunoz08 3 months ago
@smunoz08 no, that still proven to be really accurate.
The claim that mass can't travel with the speed of light is wrong (apparently).
FE4R1E7Z 3 months ago
Comment removed
Clarinerd617 2 months ago
C++ :D
vonnic 3 months ago
I'm thinking that maybe the equation for mass/energy equivalence should be more complex than Einstein thought.
Desmaad 3 months ago
Shouldn't the symbol for faster than light be >c?
Desmaad 3 months ago
Shouldn't the symbol for faster than light be >c?
Desmaad 3 months ago
LIVERPOOL ARE GOING TO WIN THE LEAGUE!!! Not this season, but within Steven Gerrards era. By the way. I like persons who likes Liverpool more than other people :)
fyrstikknerd 3 months ago
The neutrinos are very unlikely to interact with any sort of particles due to it's lack of charges, and particles in the vacuum would not hinder/refract it's trajectory. Even though, by stating that there could be small amount of particles still within the vacuum that could hinder a photons directly, seems negligible, the measurement itself was very precise (to the nanometer) leading myself to think that accounting for such measures is logical.
scottseptember1992 3 months ago
(the photons may still be going at the speed of light while bumping into such a small amount of particles/different medium, thus distorting the speed as a whole. Example: If you have to flashlights, and you shine, simultaneously, one of them with the air as the medium and the other with glass as the medium, the one traveling through air would reach an indicated destination before the other.)
scottseptember1992 3 months ago
Light travels at speed of "c" universally, however, the path may distorted by the common phenomenon known as refraction. Now, if photons and neutrinos were placed inside the (vacuumed) Large Hadron Collider, we should expect light to win the race. However, even though the circuit is "vacuumed," this doesn't necessarily mean that there's "nothing" there. That "something" may be particles of some sort that may serve to hinder the pathway of the photon....
scottseptember1992 3 months ago
Could a simple explanation of this experiment be that our human measurements of the speed of light are slightly wrong and the actual cosmic speed limit (the speed of light in vacuum) is slightly higher than we thought? Light does slow down when it passes through materials. Ambient space is not a complete vacuum, so maybe the "real" speed of light of slightly higher than thought. Neutrinos barley interact with anything, so maybe they can travel at that slightly higher "real" speed of light.
ryanhaart 3 months ago
Back in the 70's the entity SETH described how science will continue to build instruments to find smaller and smaller units without realizing that we are translating the real NONPHYSICAL thing into terms of what we're looking for; "Each particleized unit of consciousness contains within it inherently the knowledge of all other such particles— for at other levels, again, the units are operating as waves. Basically the units move FASTER THAN LIGHT, slowing down, in your terms, to form matter."
MaynardMouse 3 months ago
this is not true:
if they would do this experiment out of space ,will be diffrent :
Neutrinos is not faster than light
E=MC^2 is still true
what human issue is they could not measure speed of light right?
there are diffrent energy levels of lights, only people with current technology can mesure small part only
so Neutrinos is another only small form of ligh!!!
so, E=m(C+)^2
C+=C0+C1+C2+.....+Cn
nexsas 3 months ago
@vartex
Lol. Nah man in Stargate they utilize wormholes and alternate dimensions. (hyperspace, subspace). I really miss that show...
MumboAus 3 months ago
Maybe Im dumbass but in Stargate they sad that heres lot of thinks faster than light and Einstein was horibly wrong about everythink!
Vartrex5 3 months ago
"if youre watching this video thats proof that this thing is not a tachyon" XDD
QuantumDae 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So... a lump of Element Zero beneath the Alps? :D
NarutoEnglishFights 3 months ago
Can't wait to see the first time machine :D Might be crApple's next invention; the iTime Traveller ;)
MrElectrifyer 3 months ago
Comment removed
MrElectrifyer 3 months ago
So... a lump of Element Zero beneath the Alps? :D
flatline112233 3 months ago
I would be asking more about this time paradox, I don't really see how this causes a time issue. If they go >C then they do and the spectrum goes a bit further then we thought and time is dependent on where the object its relative to sits in the spectrum as the limit. we should know if T is violated surely, the energy level and decay of the partial, if being >C violates time they should never decay /evolve & interaction should occur before the particle is there. how fast are tachyons?
tasilbhurn 4 months ago
@tasilbhurn if you know so much about particle physics what the hell are you doing on youtube postin comments ?? should'nt you be debateing this elsewhere..like CERN for instance or maybe just your local uni !!
milton1969able 4 months ago
@milton1969able why not? :) i like to debate and ask questions. I was asking questions about this and saying what questions I would be asking about this result. But mainly I honestly dont see why the supprise, to be honest thats what I would expect to see, but I'm not a prof and have many gaps in my knowledge on the subject, but it still seems to me that it would make sense. What do you think? you dont need to be a genius, a prof, einstein or anything to have an opinion and ideas on your own.
tasilbhurn 4 months ago
@tasilbhurn ...i wasn't havin a go at you , you just seemed like you know your stuff. :)
milton1969able 4 months ago
@tasilbhurn not only was this found to be a technical fault.
there are many ways to proove that it violates time but, as a meager first year physicist, lorentz contractions is how the speed you travel at in reference to a plane affects your time, length, speed to an observer on the plane. one formula is t=(gamma)(t0), t=observed time, t0=real time and gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2). lets say the v is 2c, gamma=-(1/sqrt(3))i. this goes into imaginary numbers where gamma needs to be a real value
ieatpeople4breakfast 3 months ago
@ieatpeople4breakfast ok, a few things. Where does it say there was a technical fault? the experiment was agreed to be re-run on the 28th of October. and in that time, they re-ran the experiment, analyzed the results, published and then you come to hear about it. that is the quickest that the science community has EVER moved WELL DONE! your half-explanation still doesn't explain the questions i was asking. could you be clearer and to be honest, i think you missed the point why i asked questions.
tasilbhurn 3 months ago
@tasilbhurn my lecturers claimed there was a technical fault.... calm down, they have they're contacts.
and sorry i cant be of more help... i have only just started uni.
and my 'half explanation' summing up what i did in 7 hours of lectures on this topic in 500 characters does, funnily enough, answer your question- you cannot travel at 3i m/s.
dont be so fucking rude, i was only trying to help
ieatpeople4breakfast 3 months ago
@ieatpeople4breakfast i think you'll find that for a while the idea of it being a fault was the most popular theory to explain it. but when you add all the error margins together it still doesnt match the differance in time.
I wasnt being "fucking rude" i was being humerous. (and poor at spelling)
tasilbhurn 3 months ago
@tasilbhurn no... just no.
ieatpeople4breakfast 3 months ago
Comment removed
tasilbhurn 4 months ago
WOOO LIVERPOOL!!
aar0nkeh0e 4 months ago
Wayne Rooney?
AttemptingToBeBusy 4 months ago
Umm... how about the mass of the nutrino is warping space-time?
eeyoreofborg 4 months ago
Comment removed
4agzeddy 4 months ago
Comment removed
4agzeddy 4 months ago
whats the time dilation from gravity in our solar system? could that be the loose end?
im wondering if the time dilation effect from gravity could have no effect on neutrinos.
SCARREDMIND 4 months ago
the proof that neutrinos arent faster than the speed of light is that at the end he promised to go back in time and delete this video so if this video exists then neutrinos arent faster than light :D either that or he doesnt keep his promises
PedroJesusGomes 4 months ago
Comment removed
PedroJesusGomes 4 months ago
Comment removed
PedroJesusGomes 4 months ago
Comment removed
PedroJesusGomes 4 months ago
wouldn't 20cm be pretty important in such an accurate measurement?
jakevikoren 4 months ago
@jakevikoren it only makes a ten nanosecond difference so if it was the cause, there would still be the other 50 nanoseconds left to explain.
bipbop4232 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bipbop4232 im pretty sure the physicist studying it for 3 years at Gran would have already thought of that ... They found they errors so they are others for help
djay00009 4 months ago
Muon Neutrinos have 'negative' mass. So much so that Photons can push them ahead first.
silentonall 4 months ago
They took into account the curvature of Earth?
danielbluesmoke 4 months ago
Neutrinos travel at the speed of light (Supernova 1987a), but the speed of light is not always c.
SuperMagnetizer 4 months ago
Surely it's possible to travel faster than light. If you are driving at 100 mp/h in one direction, and a car is passing you at 100 mp/h, then the car is actually passing you at 200 mp/h. If a photon is traveling at 186,000 mp/s in one direction, and a photon passes it in the other direction going the same speed, then the photon is actually passing the other photon at twice the speed of light.
666drumreaper666 4 months ago
@666drumreaper666 Neither are truly going twice the speed of light, though. That's just perspective of it.
Shikiba93 4 months ago
@Shikiba93 But it shouldn't be possible for it to look like it's going twice the speed of light, if the speed of light is the limit.
666drumreaper666 4 months ago
@666drumreaper666 It doesn't really matter what it looks like though, I mean.. it simply isn't going twice the speed of light, that's what I'm saying.
Shikiba93 4 months ago
@666drumreaper666 that's the trick. No matter from what perspective you are, light is always at the speed as stated by einstein. It's confusing but it's the basic principle of relativity.
midgetwars1 4 months ago in playlist More videos from sixtysymbols
I wish I could go back in time ... my bank manager would love this.
oomblikkies 4 months ago
@esdjiraan yeah thats a good point still you never know we have come along way from thinking the earth is flat although i think your right im just saying
nicko198718 4 months ago
One neutrino says to another: "Warp Speed Mr. Sulu".
Two neutrinos walk into an Italian mountain.
Don't worry, if neutrinos are tachyons, you can travel back in time and prevent yourself from reading that lame time travel joke.
luckyluke193 4 months ago
If neutrinos can pass through all objects, then how can the researchers differentiate between the neutrino they seen at cern and a random neutrino which while passing through the earth happened to be detected in Italy.
1612ydraw 4 months ago
@1612ydraw I believe the direction of the reaction products are determined by multiple layers of detection.
apeek7 4 months ago
i thought that if the neutrinos are faster then light then wouldnt they have existed before the expansion of the universe. just guessing, Not a physicist. soz if wrong
artilleryboy1 4 months ago
Wtf my name is Brady........
1029847529085 4 months ago
I KNOW THE ANSWER
J4YM5 4 months ago
Comment removed
J4YM5 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So if you could travel at a speed above the speed of light you would become immortal? or travel in the future? or both?
mihaimoldo 4 months ago