K-Tec

DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90636 by joner
DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?. was created by joner
www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/22/cern_spots_ftl_neutrinos/


Nice.

We might be going to the stars after all :) .

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90639 by dave_lillis
Replied by dave_lillis on topic Re: DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.
I'd bet the discovery channel will have a program on this soon enough if the results are repeatable.

Dave L. on facebook , See my images in flickr
Chairman. Shannonside Astronomy Club (Limerick)

Carrying around my 20" obsession is going to kill me,
but what a way to go. :)
+ 12"LX200, MK67, Meade2045, 4"refractor

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90641 by joner
Replied by joner on topic Re: DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.
I seen the story break on Newsnight (BBC) last night. The correspondent claimed that the same effect was seen in an experiment a few years ago in the Fermi labs in the US .At the time Fermi ignored the data and put it down to bad data.

If this can be repeated again in experiments then this blows everything we know about the universe out of the water ...unless of course your an avid scifi fan and know that warp power is a fact ;) .

Roll on the future :).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90642 by Nerro
Replied by Nerro on topic Re: DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.
If that's going to turn out to be true I will have a serious talk with my physics teacher about those bad marks she wrote me in school :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90643 by Seanie_Morris
Replied by Seanie_Morris on topic Re: DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.
"While the researchers are still advocating “prudence” in the face of these results, they believe their observations – in which the neutrinos made the 730 km journey 60 nanoseconds faster than light would have done – are accurate."

Wow...

Midlands Astronomy Club.
Radio Presenter (Midlands 103), Space Enthusiast, Astronomy Outreach Co-ordinator.
Former IFAS Chairperson and Secretary.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 8 months ago #90645 by albertw
Replied by albertw on topic Re: DOOOOOOM for physics..are we ?.
The experiments in 2007 were not at Fermilab, they measure neutrinos from the Neutrino Main Injector at Fermilab but are measured at the MINOS detector about 700km or so away. Similarly the work done on the current story was not CERN. The speeds from the MINOS experiment were not 'bad data', however a superluminous claim fell within experimental error (uncertainty of the exact distance iirc). It's also not a matter of 'repeating it again' the results are based of statistical data taken since 2009; they have repeated it about 16000 times.

If the values that OPERA are presenting were correct then we should not have seen the 1987a supernova show up in neutrino detectors. They should have appeared years, and not three hours, before the visible light. We have pretty good evidence that they don't go faster than c. So it'll be interesting to see what's actually going on here.

The preprint of the paper is at arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897

Still, the GPS in my car was still working this morning, so special relativity is doing just fine :) Which is just as well since GPS is used to measure the length of the OPERA tunnel.

Pesky little neutrinos... I'm going to have to update my neutrino talk yet again!

Albert White MSc FRAS
Chairperson, International Dark Sky Association - Irish Section
www.darksky.ie/

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.118 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum