In Repetition of Controversial Experiment, Neutrinos Beat Light Speed Once Again

What happened to that article disproving this claim? If the experiment is flawed it will produce false observations. I'm not trying to play the bad guy here, just cautiously optimistic... because is a particle other than light breaks the speed limit we might be at the precipice of becoming a truly space faring species.

@larsonrw

I was wondering the same thing.
That article seemed to explain the observations fairly clearly... something to do with relativistic motion of the satellites that clocked the neutrinos speed.
What seemed most convincing was when they took this into account, the difference accounted for the 60 nanoseconds.

Again, Einstein is right. His theories have been proven. But here's what I think may be happening . . .
Perhaps, Neutrinos are not traveling faster than light. Matter just cannot break the speed of light - it's just not possible. But, anything can travel faster than light in a sense if you approach your destination in a different manner. That is, taking a shortcut. Light travels through space the same way every surface organism on this planet does - to get from point A to point B we must travel on the curvature of the earth so in essence for all of us on earth traveling takes about the same time (plus or minus supersonic speeds). Likewise, light must go through the curvature of space to get from point A to point B . . . but what if we took a shortcut to our destination? If I dug a whole trough the earth straight from New York to Beijing than I could get there faster than if I traveled around earth's curvature.
There are currently two ways to take shortcuts through space that is by use of a Worm Hole or compressing space-time. Perhaps something has happened that neutrinos are taking a mini worm hole to their destination . . or the experiment is compressing space-time in front of the neutrinos. Perhaps once the neutrinos reach a certain speed a wormhole naturally opens and the neutrinos themselves start to beat the speed of light. Sort of like when a supersonic jet reaches supersonic speeds, the craft itself beats the speed of sound . . .

@menoc

I've read a similar explaination... there certainly seems to be many.

I had to find the article to remember clearly, but here was one more argument that seemed fairly convincing:

"In one paper, two professors from Boston University, Andrew G. Cohen and the Nobelist Sheldon L. Glashow, showed that if the neutrinos had been going faster than light en route to Gran Sasso, they would have lost energy at a fearsome rate by emitting other particles, causing distortions in the beam that were not seen by Opera."

@menoc
That's not how wormholes work. At all.

If an experiment is flawed, repeating it only proves the flaw, not the theory. The claims against the theory that aren't systematic in Cern/Gran Sasso are still pretty reasonable and, as this article points out and as anyone with a lick of sense would point out, this proves nothing until it's replicated at another facility.

@Heavyhand

You can make anything fit your own theory if you know how to play around with the math. I'm sure they could have made it account for the difference with another phenomenon if they wanted to. People will find ways to disprove what they don't want to believe. I guess that's the scientific method but I think we are on the verge of discovering that we can go to Gliesa 581 within human lifetimes and even faster.

Not to be rudem but menoc your comment is irrelevant and completely without understanding of the matter at hand. Not to mention the experiment itself designed with humans limited perception of the world is likely flawed due to our lack of understanding of the 'matter' at hand.

Neutrinos themselves are scarcely understood. Understood as well as looking at a race car drive around the track while viewing from the spectator stand vs understood as by the engineers who designed it.

In all likelyhood particles will and have to go faster than the speed of light, and if something is going to beat the speed of light its going to be able to beat it by a lot not just marginally. After all, do we even really understand light, or how fast it _REALLY_ goes, these Neutrino experiments are anyhow, merely materiel particulate subdivisions of particles we understand just as little of.

Thanks for reading. :)

@Sphaerus

I know how a wormhole works and I also know how the speed of light works in lation to mass . . . but guess what? . . . we might be wrong, Einstein might be wrong, Newton might be wrong . . . YOU AND I MIGHT BE WRONG ABOUT WORMHOLES.

But you are right, we should wait for results from other labs. But if the experiment is successfully replicated at another facility then I say lets throw away the current theories and start over!

The arcticle you are speaking of did not disprove anything. It was just someone crunching numbers they did not actually RUN the experiment...it was more a suggestion as to why it may be off not a disproval of anything. Also I am sure that some of the smartest people in the world would of thought of it.

@Delkomatic Some of the 'smartest' people in the world are mostly somewhat biased/one sided in thought and not radical enough thinkers. Take them out of their normal surroundings and you'll see how smart they really are.

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius --- and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." - Albert Einstein

hmm... so basically, this means one of two things: a) infinite energy is NOT required to travel at or faster than the speed of light, or b) there is an infinite amount of energy in the universe.
personally, I'm hoping for b; this could solve a lot of problems.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
why learn from your own mistakes, when you could learn from the mistakes of others?
“The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible” -Albert Ein

This situation is becoming comical.
Now if someone says Neutrinos are faster than light, should I believe them?
Or
If someone says speed of light is absolute, should I believe them too?
This tennis game gone on too long and become too public; it causes me to have doubts from both directions.
Yes, it is comical.
Oh, that is not a good thing.

.............................
Science sees no further than what it can sense.
Religion sees beyond the senses.

Then there is this possibility, their instruments are not accurate enough. Even though this experiment is supposed to be extremely accurate, it's still not quite accurate enough because the margin of error might be larger than they think it is and they need to make instruments with even lower margins of error. The other thing is that the proposed speed of light might not be as accurate as they think it is.

does this mean neutrionos have no mass?

Something good should come out of this. It's about time another breakthrough in physics occurs to move us forward. Sick of being stuck in the same place to suffer the ego of a few who want to continue being right by sticking with archaic preconceptions.

Did that just happen? Did that really just happen?! No! For real, did that just happen?! I need to know if it did, because if it did then the ####'s about to hit the fan! Did that really happen?!! No, it couldn't have. There's no way! It's not possible.

SAME BULL####!!!

I have a question for anyone interested in answering it.. I don't have any legitimate scientific background or knowledge, but I do watch and/or read plenty of scientific articles and documentaries, etc.

My question is this:
Is it possible for a particle on another "plane" of the universe, or a different universe perhaps, to interact with our own WITHOUT abiding by THIS universe's "laws"? For example, would it be possible for neutrinos, or any similar particles discovered in the future that "move faster than light", not to have mass..? I know that may be a stupid question, however scientists also make discoveries that contradict their current understanding of how some things work or operate.

I would like someone with a better understanding of particle physics than I to answer, thank you :)

IF the results turn out to be true that v (neutrino) is faster than C
and IF we discover v mass = 0

than perhaps we will end up with...
E = Mv2

so science as we know it might not need to start from scratch, but rather refine C speed into v speed. a little nano-scale nudging.

do any math people know if that would make sense?

@vagabond2

The equation still makes sense...
Your new equation is the same as the old equation, you are just suggesting that we update the speed of light. Something that hasn't really changed in a long time, we've only felt the need to refine the value by adding more numbers after the decimal.
Realizing we were wrong about the speed of light would probably upset the scientific community more than the discovery that something could move faster, IMHO.

Which is why I love cosmology and physics. It's like the Wild Wild West. They haven't lost sight of the fact that they're on the frontiers of discovery and that what may have been true 50 years ago is open to challenge. Those physicists must have much more malleable grey matter than most biologists, anthropologists and many climate scientists. When was the last time an anthropologist conceded that the random, minuscule bone fragments they found may actually be the ancestor(s) of apes not humans?

I think this is cool even if its proved to be false. Although I hope it could be true because it could be the step in the right direction for space travel, right?

The results I feel are quasi at best. It definetly proves more testing is needed and with fresh eyes!

until it is verified at a different site by different researchers it is meaningless, speculation at this point is a waste of time, cheers

@vagabond and everyone else

Neutrinos have been found to have a mass. That's the result of the testing at the Sudan Mine Physics Lab in Northeastern, MN near Ely, MN or in other words the boundary waters. I've been on a tour of the place myself actually.

[ Begging for Life] Complaint about IBM China CSR on Centennial

Please Google:

IBM detained mother of ex-employee on the day of centennial
or
How Much IBM Can Get Away with is the Responsibility of the Media
or
Tragedy of Labor Rights Repression in IBM China
or
IBM Advised to Treat its People with Humanism in China

I tend to think of this issue as such:

At one point in time, everyone thought planet Earth was flat. With the advancement of technology, this "fact" was disproven. Likewise with the speed of light... At one point in time, everyone thought "NOTHING" could move faster than the speed of light. With the advancement of technology, this "fact" MAY be disproven. I'm not going to sit in my own IGNORANCE and say that it's "impossible"...

I hope that scientists disprove the theory that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. It's fun to disconbobble the minds of everyone~*!!

~~Imagine if we all "7 billion" of us used our brains together towards the advancement of technology instead of fighting/killing~~

Maybe neutrinos passing through matter without interfering with it means they ignore Earth's gravity curvature of space .. they take the shortcut through hyperspace. Just an opinion.

ovidrg,
Here is the funny thing. These guys who are speaking about and arguing about faster than light neutrinos have brains so big, that they have to put popcycle sticks around their necks with with tape, just to hold up their big brains.

The rest of us to jump in the conversation is well, just impossible.

So for you or me to suggest a random idea for them to notice is just funny. First of all can you tell me mathematically all you know about hyperspace? At this point you may feel I am insulting you. I just wish to say, I am not. I could not explain it either. I really am not trying to insult you sir.

But another thing about all this neutrinos possibly being faster than light, then not, they yes, then not, then yes, it is now very much a public street brawl and to the rest of the world, they are really kind of looking stupid.

And for them to look so stupid to me is surprising, because in fact they are so incredibly smart.

Ok, I have vented enough...

Let’s put it another way. If tomorrow they announce to the world the speed of light is the limit does that give you a warm fuzzy of confidence?
Or
If tomorrow they say neutrinos are faster than light, do you believe them?

I guess, I am saying, I do not like the manner of how this is being displayed publically, until all these geniuses come to the facts.

...............................
I am just so Qurious!

Maybe they're just trying to get more government GRANT$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I get the impression, most here don't have a CLUE! And LEAVE THE DUMB HYPERSPACE AND BENDING SPACE CRAP OUT OF IT. (SPACE HAS NO GENERAL FORM AND THERE'S NO STUPID TUNNELING EITHER!!)

The properties of space are defined by the particles in it. True _NOTHING_ has no attributes, it is like an undefined variable.

AND PLEASE LEAVE [E=MC^2] OUT OF THIS, THE EQUATION IS ONLY VALID FOR LIGHT, AND ONLY UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES!!

PS the mere presence of light will result in an expanding universe, NOW WAY ROUND THAT, it gives space properties as it moves through it. Nuff said. :)

@rg-5

At the risk of sounding antagonizing, which is not my intent at all, for the majority that seem to not have a clue, could you please enlighten us? I believe the only reason people are mentioning parallel dimensions (i.e. hyperspace, subspace, and whatever other concoction of fiction), and energy equations with respect to the speed of light is because of the implications such a discovery would have on what people currently label between possible and impossible.

I myself don't claim to be an expert or even a novice, but wouldn't it stand to reason that if light were not the universal speed limit, with respect to the energy equation, our understanding of energy is incomplete or incorrect?

But let's say it is correct. Would it not stand to reason that the only way any particle can move faster than the speed of light is through a special relativistic condition that has a localized effect on the region of spacetime where the speed limit was broken?

I'm sure most of us understand (at least I hope most of us understand) that these scientists have taken into account the curvature of the Earth. Their calculations of how long it would take light to reach a certain point on the planet is based on the straight line path between the facilities with respect to the Earth's surface (which is not a straight line). If you take the equation for determining velocity and flip it to determine time from the product of a linear displacement and a given velocity, such as C (the speed of light) as a function of v (velocity); T = dC, then you should have the precise time it takes for light to travel the linear distance.

Something has to account for the readings. Whether it's something occurring in nature, something we're doing technologically, or something the scientists are doing to get attention and funding. More test are definitely needed to quantify the findings. I still say the outcome has more potential to shed light on something tremendous. Even if it indicates that the most brilliant minds this world has to offer made the biggest cosmic blunder of miscalculations in a scientific experiment. That discovery would show us that scientists are just as human as the next person, and not demigods in mortal form like many want to be. Anyone can seem magnificent if they know something that someone else doesn't commonly know. It's a matter of how important being magnificent is to you.

That's why I ask that if you have better knowledge and understanding, help out the rest of us that don't. There are those of us willing to listen and learn more than dismiss and rebuke.

The curvature of the earth has obviously been taken into account. (Neutrinos are able to pass through ordinary matter almost unaffected(weak sub-atomic force-> does affect them to an unknown degree, how, we don't 'really' know) they are also affected by gravitation(weakly, because they have very small mass).

Generally as to why they go faster than light (according to the experiment) I can not speculate at the moment, Space 'tunneling', 'hyperspace' and such are not involved here, for these are just human understandable abstract descriptions of very different processes than their names seem to purport(they are used for far larger particles than neutrinos, and as I said are only ways for the feeble human mind to make a approximate model of the real thing). (Or they are just plain sci-fi imaginations)(Ps dont loose your imagination, best tool ever... Anywhere!)

Anyways, the 0.00000006 Seconds time difference between arrival would mean a distance between the two of 17.98754748 meters. (Not that much) We haven't even actually raced light together with neutrinos along a path to _REALLY) see what happens(Particle Drag race!!)(Should be the next step)
The only possible explanations I can actually give with relative certainty is instrument timing error(they are themselves made of matter containing neutrinos :D) And that odd distance between the two has me wondering, about how large those 732Km would be between the testing sites if all the empty space along the way were removed from the atoms. (But that's just creative thinking along the way.) As to actually 'ENLIGHTENING' you I'm afraid I have little to offer in a place like this, it would prob first involve a Physics Lecture.(Too bad most of ya sneered at the class Nerd, LOL)(But Wikipedia is an excellent resource, mailing CERN's PR department is also a good idea, they wont mind sending you a data set(In case you come up with some rad idea)

The most basic problem though is likely our understanding of the process. The speed of light we have, isn't even definitive, its an AVERAGE!(Runs out the door... papers flying)
I'm anyhow not such a great fan of these experiments, they're too 'jumpy' trying to understand things at an ever smaller level, without actually even having a clue what goes on with less complex things. Our own sensual observation of the world is poop. One thing I can though tell you for certain:

We don't know shit! As my professor used to say, yet we think we do and we shall carry on nonetheless, it can only get better or worse so we might as well try! (Then whispering: I've been trying for quite a while now):D

On another note, when do they even know when to start the timer once releasing the Neutrinos???? They prob go through several detectors along the way... but do the detectors affect them?? Can their Computer timing chips even compute to within a margin that small? Titan SuperC, maybe?

Guys, the experiment shot neutrinos 450miles. Earths mass effect on the curvature of space had to be tested by aiming a telescope armed with directional gyros at a distant star. This is because of how small the effect earths mass has on space. So I don't think that this factor would make a difference in this experiment.

If I'm wrong please let me know :). But give a valid argument

@All Readers (:D) Does removing the space curvature effect from the equation bring the difference to 0 or closer to 0 maybe?

If so maybe the space curvature knowledge we have is wrong, or Einsteins space bending theory(get it lol) is slightly flawed.
Or Space is affected differently outside of matter by gravitation then inside of matter(Odd insight I just got there)
Since neutrinos would move through matter and hence possibly encounter different phenomenon than we measured and accounted for.

@ rg-5:
As I just said the effect of the "curvature" is too small to effect the outcome on a measurable level.

One Neutrinos on trip to Italy over heard asking "Are we there yet??"

what i love is how people argue that this is for definite or that is for definite and they all forget we basically know less than 1 percent of what IS in this universe let alone any other universe or reality. Einstein was a very intelligent, smart imaginative man with an amazing brain..but he didnt know everything and he can easily be wrong about quite a number of things, including the speed of light theory..and that is all it is right now, theory..most of anything ANY physicist comes up with is theory. I personally believe that it is possible to go faster than the speed of light, how? i have no idea..i dont know anywhere near enough of this universe to explain it, noone in our race knows..on a galactic/universal scale..we are barely single celled organisms freshly emerged from the slime, muck and mire and for us to assume that we KNOW FOR CERTAIN what IS and IS NOT. Is foolish and arrogant to the extreme. Einstein wasnt foolish or arrogant, but i do believe he was premature in his assertion of being 100 percent sure of something so early in the human races knowledge of the universe

So,..... if the old math was wrong and it turns out Neutrinos are faster than light, then what other math equations this effects and force us to toss out. Will it make finding the all elusive GOD piratical hard to find?

Why do they call it a GOD particle? Is the scientist doing a slap in the face of the religious? If the religious make comments here, oh the wailing of tears will fall from the amateur scientist with their complaints.

No reason to make a fuss now. I did not say anything to or against religion. I am just noting some observations of life. Scientist observes and takes notes, yes?

.............................
Science sees no further than what it can sense.
Religion sees beyond the senses.

i thought that when they repeated the experiment, they changed something with the satellites so that it wouldnt mess with the time?

-Knock knock
-Who's there?
-The Doctor.
-Doctor Who?
-Yes

@rg-5

Thanks for the perspective. Should have been a little more careful with word choice. Didn't want you to enlighten me on physics in general as that would take a few lectures. I do agree that measurement errors can not be ruled out yet. We only have highly efficient, but ultimately flawed methods of measuring data, and the amount of time for which neutrinos surpassed the speed of light seems almost neglegible. We'll just have to see what the scientific community comes up with.

@everyone... stop plaing it scientists... make a papper if You have a theory... publish it... and maybe You are the next Einstein... who knows...

BTW... Ive got an idea, about it... maybe the answer to this is more simple that every one thinks...

I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was as simple as: "The time it took for the detector to process that it detected it." LOL

I have often wondered how to clock something accurately faster than the speed of light, but in effect be faster than the speed of light and so in effect we just found something faster than the speed of light, the clock itself.

I know this is not true. They were using the timing of distance to overcome their limited clocking device. But it was still fun to say in the first place.
..............................................

Perhaps the distance was not far enough in this test, to overcome the intolerance of such a fine measurement of speed.

Perhaps we need a neutrino generator landed on the moon and sending a beam toward a receptor on earth? Or send of a satellite deep into space and once it’s far enough away and we can precisely measure its distance, then again send a beam of neutrinos back to earth and clock this.

.............................
Science sees no further than what it can sense.
Religion sees beyond the senses.

Wouldnt the detector be going off prior to the exact time you fire the neutrinos if going faster than the speed of light. If so, is it reading your actions before it happens?

There is one explanation that doesn't seem to be addressed anywhere that I have seen. Is it possible that nutrinos are not effected by time dialation caused by the earths gravity? In other words, it is not that the nutrinos are moving faster than the speed of light, instead it is us who is moving slightly slower. Time moves slower on the surface than in space so if the nutrinos are not effected they would appear to us to be moving slightly faster than the speed of light.
Just a crazy idea.

You know these people at CERN are pretty smart. After the first test and the "OH SHIT" moment, I am sure they ran the experiment again. They are not a couple of guys in their garage just trying to brew beer. Now is it not possible that Einstein might have been wrong? Physics has not advanced very far since his E=Mc2 revelation, I guess because he is held up high like a physics GOD. Tesla said that Einstein was wrong. He said that Einsteins relativity was a great gobbeled-goook of math, but it was still wrong.Instead of trying to fit this amazing discovery into a bad equation, how about embracing this and saying "WOW look what we can do now". Oh and remember when you all thought the ATOM was the smallest thing???? Then you broke it open and all this OTHER shit came falling out???

As a post script.....If Einstein has been proven right....then would it not be the theory of relativity...but the fact of relativity. An idea is just a theory until it is proven.

I like Menoc's point of view. He is open to new ideas,as are some other commentators. If neutrinos can travel through rock, and has a more direct route of travel, that could account for the time difference?

I am not a physical scientist, but believe that thought waves travel nearly instantaneously. I also believe that there is a subtle form of energy, thus matter, that travels with it.

Does it make sense that the least substantial particle could travel with the least resistance, and thus travel more quickly? Could they be more able to resist the gravitational curvature of the galaxies since they are less substantial?

The experiment compares light speed in a vacuum to neutrino speed in rock. They should be comparing light speed in a vacuum to neutrino speed IN A VACUUM.

Note the caption under the photo: "Gran Sasso Something about this mountain makes particles go very fast"

Then read this essay:

fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Fraser_NatureOfTime.pdf (paper)
fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/294 (discussion)

It is about time, but has a lot to say about gravitational motion.

Neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light
If light speed is indeed constant than the way we measure it should fluxuate wildly depending on the direction you would measure it because everything in the universe is moving or travelling in relation to everything else: ie: our planet is spinning and revolving around the sun, our solar system is traveling around our galaxy, our galaxy is travelling or moving in some direction, everything is moving at a specific speed. Theoretically I suspect that we are travelling at tremendous speeds. If this is the case and the speed of light is constant, when we point the source of the light away from the actual direction we are in fact travelling and measure it, the receptor we are using to calculate the speed should theoretically be travelling towards the source of light at a the same speed our planet is travelling and detect the beam of light that much faster. The same concept should hold true if we were to shine the beam in the direction we are travelling in, the target should be moving with us, away from the source and should take longer to arrive.
I wonder if the scientists conducting the experiment that suggests that neutrinos are travelling faster than the speed of light have taken this into consideration.

wow, if they can produce pulses of neutrinos on demand and form them into a beam, this means we can do away with all that expensive fibre optic cabling between England and Australia and use neutrino as a carrier instead for internet connectivity!

i know the secrets of reaching light speed, with life size objects, like spaceships or even smaller scales and such. i jut need to patent it, please donate some money to
1704 valencia albuquerque nm 87110, any amount will help