I think I started a previous thread on this matter, but can't find it so I am starting a new one because of new developments.

Speed of light broken again as scientists test neutrino result

The speed of light appears to have been broken again after scientists carried out a new set of experiments to test measurements that could require the laws of physics to be rewritten. The researchers behind the experiments, which involved sending neutrino particles 450 miles through the ground from the CERN facility in Geneva to the Gran Sasso laboratory in Italy, have now attempted to rule out one possible source of error. By tweaking the experiment in an attempt to address a potential flaw in their original experiment, they again showed that the neutrons arrived at the Italian site some 60 billionths of a second faster than if they had been travelling at the speed of light.

Scientists have posted new results that confirm measurements made in September that a beam of subatomic particles had travelled faster than the speed of light.

The initial result caused widespread debate as it appeared to break one of the most fundamental laws of physics – that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

The findings have proved troubling for scientists as it goes against Albert Einstein's law of special relativity and opens up the possibility of being able to send information back in time.

This really does amaze me. Even if there was an error in the first test (which so far they have yet to find evidence of), this test yielded the same results...TWICE! This is incredible for science. The amount of things we could do if we were able to harness such power in small spaces at a constant, would be near endless. This could very well be a new era of science we never thought possible.

---

"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible". Hebrews 11.3

read this thread

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

... the same results...TWICE! This is incredible for science. The amount of things we could do ...

The repeat of the results is reassuring in that Gran Sasso are consistent for their measurements. That still leaves working through some further checks for them to be sure of what exactly they are measuring... See some of my guesses in the other thread.

There's a long way to go yet before suggesting anything 'faster than light'.


Meanwhile, even at mere normal light speed, their apparatus could make for a nicely fast internet connection through to the opposite side of the Earth! ;-)

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

They detected 16000 neutrinos out of billions in the first run and 20 in the second run. Even if a neutrino can carry a bit, this is not enough to transmit a signal.
Tullio

---

But than why jets of matter from Quasar only able to move close to the speed of light, not exceed the speed of light?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar#Properties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blazar#Relativistic_beaming

The neutrinos coming from the 1987A supernova arrived almost simultaneously with the photons, allowing for the time needed to the photons to escape the gravitational field of the supernova. This is still the biggest argument against the OPERA result.
Tullio

---

Without having through every post here, perhaps we could explain things as follows:

If two particles are found to be arriving at slightly different periods having been beamed from one specific place to another specific place, maybe that is because we are a little uncertain about what the exact speed of light is.

If the differences are so small, one might assume that the particle or type of particle shown to be traveling the fastest is showing the 'true' speed of light.

As far as I hear, particles are thought not to exceed the speed of light, which is a constant.

But both Einstein's theories as well as Werner Karl Eisenbergs' theories of uncertainty (which may or may not delve with the same or almost same subjects - gravity and quantum theory, not necessarily just energy and matter) would lead one to speculate that uncertainties in what is regarded as being constants (and therefore or thereby being part of formulas or equations) are making the scientists unable to tell the real thing with exact precision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Heisenberg

Einstein by the way was dealing with the subject of relativity, I do not know whether that meant gravity.

At least he did not like speculating about Quantum theory.

General relativity includes a theory of gravitational fields. Unified field theory, also by Einstein, tried to unify gravitation and electromagnetism. He did not consider the nuclear interactions, described by quantum field theories. They include both nuclear interactions and electromagnetism, but not gravitation. A Grand Unified Theory, also called a Theory of Everything, is still missing.
Tullio

---

A post in theregister.co.uk says that another group of Italian physicists, ICARUS, puts into doubt the results of the OPERA cooperation with the same argument already used by Cohen and Glashow: superluminal neutrinos should generate photons and particle/antiparticle couples, like in the Cherenkov effect, which are not seen.The subject is open.
Tullio

---

A post in theregister.co.uk says that another group of Italian physicists, ICARUS, puts into doubt the results of the OPERA cooperation with the same argument already used by Cohen and Glashow: superluminal neutrinos should generate photons and particle/antiparticle couples, like in the Cherenkov effect, which are not seen.The subject is open.
Tullio

Love those circular arguments. The standard theory says it has do to ... but it doesn't so it can't.

---

The neutrinos coming from the 1987A supernova arrived almost simultaneously with the photons, allowing for the time needed to the photons to escape the gravitational field of the supernova. This is still the biggest argument against the OPERA result.
Tullio

We still don't fully understand supernovas, though. Besides, the neutrinos were detected 3 hours before the visible light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1987A#Neutrino_emissions

We still don't fully understand supernovas, though. Besides, the neutrinos were detected 3 hours before the visible light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1987A#Neutrino_emissions

Yes, that was the first detection by the Mont Blanc group which happened at 2:56 hours U.T. on February 23 1987.A second burst was detected at 7:35 hours at Kamiokande, IMB and Baksan, All this is described in an article by P.Galeotti, G.V.Pallottino and G.Pizzella "SN1987A; Revisiting the data and the correlation between neutrinos and gravitational detectors". I have a hard copy but I no longer remember the link. The article is dated 21 October 2008.
Tullio

---