Speed of light exceeded at Cern?

Ben D Bus · 22-09-2011 6:12pm #1

Could it be true, and not an experimental error?

The experiment involved firing neutrinos over a distance of 732km. If I read the report correctly, then over the course of 15000 such measurements, a statistically very significant number, but not all, broke the speed of light.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

stimpson · 22-09-2011 6:15pm

In your face, Einstein!

MrStuffins · 22-09-2011 6:16pm

Holy sh*t!

Arciphel · 22-09-2011 6:19pm

We need more "safety cameras" in the LHC to fine these neutrinos for their excessive speed. Pretty amazing if true.

longhalloween · 22-09-2011 6:20pm

Forget electric cars, we're gonna be getting warp drives!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 22-09-2011 6:24pm

Science, you're an idiot if you disagree with us until we tell you why we were wrong.

ButcherOfNog · 22-09-2011 6:32pm

perhaps its the measurement of time itself that's wrong.

stimpson · 22-09-2011 6:47pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

Science, you're an idiot if you disagree with us until we tell you why we were wrong.

Religion - your an idiot if you disagree with us until we massacre your people and take your land/oil/attractive females.

Ben D Bus · 22-09-2011 6:57pm

If you google the thread title, boards.ie comes 4th!

We're ahead of the posse on this one.

Although others can now catch up faster than previously thought

hmmm · 22-09-2011 7:06pm

Shirley some mistake.

If not, wow, this is the coolest thing that's happened since 2014.

ILikeBananas · 22-09-2011 8:35pm

Jaafa · 22-09-2011 8:36pm

I always felt that even if the speed of light were definite we'd find some way around it. How else we gona get those blue bastar!ds?

Cú Giobach · 22-09-2011 10:09pm

stimpson wrote: »

In your face, Einstein!

"If I can see further than anyone else, it is only because I am standing on the shoulders of giants" : Isaac Newton

[-0-] · 25-09-2011 3:14pm

The speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s, and the neutrinos did not go faster than this through the earth, they just went faster than what the guys think light would have went through the earth.

The neutrinos never went faster than 299 792 458 m / s.

There are particles out there that go faster than light through certain mediums.
Cerenkov Radiation is an example of this in water. CERN made themselves look rather foolish.

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae219.cfm

WalterMitty · 25-09-2011 4:19pm

[-0-] wrote: »

The speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s, and the neutrinos did not go faster than this through the earth, they just went faster than what the guys think light would have went through the earth.

The neutrinos never went faster than 299 792 458 m / s.

There are particles out there that go faster than light through certain mediums.
Cerenkov Radiation is an example of this in water. CERN made themselves look rather foolish.

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae219.cfm

A physics professor on tv said the neutrinos travelled faster than light in a vacuum. That sounds like faster than light to me, and not faster than light through a medium which slows down light.

stimpson · 25-09-2011 4:26pm

WalterMitty wrote: »

A physics professor on tv said the neutrinos travelled faster than light in a vacuum. That sounds like faster than light to me, and not faster than light through a medium which slows down light.

And the fact that the earth isnt transparent means light can't travel through it in any case.

Anonymo · 25-09-2011 10:52pm

[-0-] wrote: »

The speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s, and the neutrinos did not go faster than this through the earth, they just went faster than what the guys think light would have went through the earth.

The neutrinos never went faster than 299 792 458 m / s.

There are particles out there that go faster than light through certain mediums.
Cerenkov Radiation is an example of this in water. CERN made themselves look rather foolish.

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae219.cfm

As WalterMitty said you are incorrect on this. I know this is a forum
for popular science so I don't want to sound too harsh. Even so, it's
a bit silly to think that CERN physicists - some of the best in the
business - would make an error like you've mentioned.
The controversy is precisely that these lads have measured the
speed of the neutrinos to be faster than the speed of light in a
vacuum (the fastest that any information is supposed to be able
to travel through any medium). There are uncertainties to their measurement, e.g. uncertainties in measuring the distance from
CERN to Gran Sasso (this is the one that a lot of people are questioning). They've tried to be very careful but haven't been able to find any
explanation that would explain a spurious 'detection'.
As such, they've presented their findings so that others may find
one.

delw · 26-09-2011 12:01am

go easy on me people but what are the implications to the laws of physics with this news as regards to light years to planets & galaxies etc? ...,fascinating story

Doubt.It · 26-09-2011 3:42am

None at all, if - as seems very, very likely - the result is due to an unknown error.

If it's not - and if physics is also right about neutrinos having some mass - than the implications are very difficult to work out because it would mean that there was a vast error on our understanding of... it all. Special relativity would have to be wrong.

How wrong? Let the wild and unfounded speculations begin. One could argue the maximum possible speed in the universe is actually slightly higher than the speed of light in a vacuum, but that would be very unsatisfying.

Or one could argue that it means there's a way for matter to pass the "light barrier" somehow and that, yes, faster than light travel would be possible. But don't hold your breath. If that were true, why are these particles accelerated with huge energies only going *just* over the speed of light?

This is going to turn out to be some fiendishly devious error. As physics professor Matt Strassler rather emphatically put it, "Hyperventilating about the impending collapse of existing theoretical physics is a tad inappropriate at this time."

jumpjack · 26-09-2011 6:28am

It would be cool if neutrinos passed through some "weird material" which let them accelerate them over LS.

Doubt.It · 26-09-2011 12:43pm

Well one attempt to explain this is that they move through a "weird space", made up of other dimensions than the ones we're familiar with. As you probably know, most attempts to unify quantum mechanics with relativity require extra dimensions of space. What if - for some non-obvious reason - it takes less time to cross a space made out of these mysterious dimensions?

I don't really believe this is the answer here, but I've attempted to explain it in more detail on my blog.

Capt'n Midnight · 26-09-2011 6:31pm

[-0-] wrote: »

The speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s, and the neutrinos did not go faster than this through the earth, they just went faster than what the guys think light would have went through the earth.

It's the interaction of photons with matter that slows photons down,

neutrinos don't interact that much with matter so maybe not slowed down as much ?

Doubt.It · 26-09-2011 10:43pm

I hope nothing can slow neutrinos down. Because if they're travelling a little faster than light, and they're slowed to the speed of light...

Can anyone imagine the consequences?

amen · 27-09-2011 1:01pm

Can anyone imagine the consequences?

I assume you trying to infer massive energy loss thus massive explosion?

There are many ways to slow something down without an explosion.

Think of the shuttle entering the atmosphere, a bullet travelling through the air

etc

Alvin T. Grey · 28-09-2011 12:42pm

amen wrote: »

I assume you trying to infer massive energy loss thus massive explosion?

There are many ways to slow something down without an explosion.

Think of the shuttle entering the atmosphere, a bullet travelling through the air

etc

Both of which give off considerable energy one kinetic, the other potential. - But the nature of FTL objects are that they can't be slowed down beyond C. - Look at photons, they exist at C, but they can't be slowed. Blocked? Of course, Obsorbed? Yep, but not slowed.

A photon traveling at 0.999999* C is impossible.

WalterMitty · 29-09-2011 8:44pm

Alvin T. Grey wrote: »

Both of which give off considerable energy one kinetic, the other potential. - But the nature of FTL objects are that they can't be slowed down beyond C. - Look at photons, they exist at C, but they can't be slowed. Blocked? Of course, Obsorbed? Yep, but not slowed.

A photon traveling at 0.999999* C is impossible.

What about light travelling through mediums?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_light

stimpson · 29-09-2011 9:33pm

WalterMitty wrote: »

What about light travelling through mediums?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_light

C is the speed of light in a vacuum.

Allosaur · 30-09-2011 8:56am

WalterMitty wrote: »

What about light travelling through mediums?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_light

AFIK that's phasing and dispersion. The actual speed of light the wave doesn't change it's apparent speed does.

Rubecula · 29-10-2011 12:45pm

According to BBC News they are about to redo the experiment at Cern.

I think this is going to be one of the most carefully watched experiments of all time.