Scientists: Particles Appear to Travel Faster Than Light

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Subatomic particles sent between two labs (over 450 miles apart) traveling faster than the speed of light? I think I'm going to need some independent, third-party verification before I start questioning Einstein theory.

Scientists in Switzerland say an experiment appears to show that tiny particles traveled faster than the speed of light -- a result that would seem to defy the laws of nature. The physicists say that neutrinos sent 730 kilometers (453.6 miles) underground between laboratories in Switzerland and Italy arrived a fraction of a second sooner than they should have, according to the speed of light.
Click to expand...
 
They discovered the infamous Nyan particle...
nyan.gif
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44629271/ns/technology_and_science-science/

"CERN says a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant. But given the enormous implications of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there were no flaws in the experiment."

Additional party verification is exactly what they're looking for. That's a pretty big difference and they can't find anything the did wrong.

but on the other hand,

WOOT! :D
 
What I always wondered about light is: Why does it need to travel so fast? Is it fleeing a crime scene?

Anyway, looking forward to more independant research. Very interesting indeed.
 
It would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a particle with mass to the speed of light. But it doesn't mean particles can't travel faster than light. You just can't accelerate them to that speed. Something to think about at parties when you're bored.
 
Those Nutrino's had better be careful, the swiss take speed limits verry seriously :D

If they are right, the implications could be huge, but isn't that why so much was invested in CERN? to learn new things?

The speed of light varies depending on the medium, could it be that these nutrino's don't exceed the speed of light, but that the speed of light as we know it isn't the maximum? That there are certain conditions where it is higher?

Could the conditions inside the accelorator have been altered ever so slightly by previous high energy experiments to change the 'medium'?
 
LeninGHOLA said:
What I always wondered about light is: Why does it need to travel so fast? Is it fleeing a crime scene?

Anyway, looking forward to more independant research. Very interesting indeed.
Click to expand...

It only travels so fast to make sure that you need an energy level of over 9000 to successfully time travel.
 
Outside_In said:
It would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a particle with mass to the speed of light. But it doesn't mean particles can't travel faster than light. You just can't accelerate them to that speed. Something to think about at parties when you're bored.
Click to expand...

very interesting, have a good link that expounds upon that?
 
"Hey, if you'd been listening, you'd know that Nintendos pass through everything."
 
Outside_In said:
It would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a particle with mass to the speed of light. But it doesn't mean particles can't travel faster than light. You just can't accelerate them to that speed. Something to think about at parties when you're bored.
Click to expand...

You're wrong.
 
Raxiel said:
Those Nutrino's had better be careful, the swiss take speed limits verry seriously :D

If they are right, the implications could be huge, but isn't that why so much was invested in CERN? to learn new things?

The speed of light varies depending on the medium, could it be that these nutrino's don't exceed the speed of light, but that the speed of light as we know it isn't the maximum? That there are certain conditions where it is higher?

Could the conditions inside the accelorator have been altered ever so slightly by previous high energy experiments to change the 'medium'?
Click to expand...

The speed of light, as we understood it, was the speed at which light traveled when there is no medium (i.e. vacuum). Having to pass though a medium (e.g. air, water, trace gasses left in the limited vacuums we can create, etc) slows light down. So, having particles passed through a medium and arriving faster than it should have if there's was no medium at all is completely defies what we understand about light and even time.
 
What's the equivalent to a sonic boom for particles traveling faster than light? I think it'd be pretty impressive to see... if we could see it
 
ryan_975 said:
The speed of light, as we understood it, was the speed at which light traveled when there is no medium (i.e. vacuum). Having to pass though a medium (e.g. air, water, trace gasses left in the limited vacuums we can create, etc) slows light down. So, having particles passed through a medium and arriving faster than it should have if there's was no medium at all is completely defies what we understand about light and even time.
Click to expand...

Exactly, 299,792,458 m/s in the absence of matter. But is it possible there are conditions (not necessarily naturaly occuring) that are 'more empty' than that?

I'm no physicist, just a curious bystander.

Of course, if the scientists at CERN have been scratching their heads over this for a month or so while checking their work, so i'm sure it's far more complex than that.
 
I love that God had the foresight to make the universe so complex that we would still be figuring it out even 2000+ years after His Son saved us.
 
A medium that is over 450 miles long. How do you verify conditions at a near vacuum at such a length? Because it's a not a true vacuum, they may have miscalculated the effect of the matter inside the medium or perhaps it's a shockwave effect.
 
ryan_975 said:
The speed of light, as we understood it, was the speed at which light traveled when there is no medium (i.e. vacuum). Having to pass though a medium (e.g. air, water, trace gasses left in the limited vacuums we can create, etc) slows light down. So, having particles passed through a medium and arriving faster than it should have if there's was no medium at all is completely defies what we understand about light and even time.
Click to expand...

Yep, they measured the time it took the neutrinos to arrive to be 60ns less then light would if it were in a vacuum.
 
So if this turns out to be the real deal then I guess there there could be some pretty neat applications for this in technology decades from now. Can you say Intel FasterThanLightPeak? :D
 
okashira said:
Yep, they measured the time it took the neutrinos to arrive to be 60ns less then light would if it were in a vacuum.
Click to expand...

And the neutrinos were NOT moving in a vacuum if I'm not mistaken, which makes that difference even more spectacular.

Makes my Mustang seem REAL slow :(
 
GushpinBob said:
So if this turns out to be the real deal then I guess there there could be some pretty neat applications for this in technology decades from now. Can you say Intel FasterThanLightPeak? :D
Click to expand...

Or just Intel NeutrinoPeak ?
 
RoundArc said:
A medium that is over 450 miles long. How do you verify conditions at a near vacuum at such a length? Because it's a not a true vacuum, they may have miscalculated the effect of the matter inside the medium or perhaps it's a shockwave effect.
Click to expand...

Even a supposed shockwave can't travel faster then the speed of light.
The theory of relativity extents to even dictate that information can't travel faster then the speed of light, let alone waves or particles.

And why would they need to verify? We already know the speed of light. The only thing that needs verification is the 450 mile long distance.

BTW, there have been SOL measurments done at such lengths in vacuum. :)
 
I like how the laws that govern everything we think we know about how the Universe woks can possibly be proven wrong but the evidence for man-man global warming is "irrefutable" and anyone who says otherwise is called a hack and a lier.
 
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. said:
I like how the laws that govern everything we think we know about how the Universe woks can possibly be proven wrong but the evidence for man-man global warming is "irrefutable" and anyone who says otherwise is called a hack and a lier.
Click to expand...

Get out of here STALKER!
 
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. said:
I like how the laws that govern everything we think we know about how the Universe woks can possibly be proven wrong but the evidence for man-man global warming is "irrefutable" and anyone who says otherwise is called a hack and a lier.
Click to expand...
u mad?
 
okashira said:
Even a supposed shockwave can't travel faster then the speed of light.
The theory of relativity extents to even dictate that information can't travel faster then the speed of light, let alone waves or particles.
Click to expand...

Right. Any "shockwave" would have to trail the particles, not lead them.
 
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. said:
I like how the laws that govern everything we think we know about how the Universe woks can possibly be proven wrong but the evidence for man-man global warming is "irrefutable" and anyone who says otherwise is called a hack and a lier.
Click to expand...

So scientists using the scientific method to show particles may have gone faster than light somehow refutes other scientists using the scientific method to show anthropogenic warming?

It would be funny if it wasn't so painfully retarded.
 
TwistedAegis said:
So scientists using the scientific method to show particles may have gone faster than light somehow refutes other scientists using the scientific method to show anthropogenic warming?

It would be funny if it wasn't so painfully retarded.
Click to expand...


Science isn't a science. I mean, explain magnets, man.

Aren't you supposed to be in Vegas looking at boobies?
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Science isn't a science. I mean, explain magnets, man.

Aren't you supposed to be in Vegas looking at boobies?
Click to expand...

I'm back after I figured out the ladies in that fancy place with the flashing lights didn't really like me for my magnetic personality.

And for further proof of faster than light movement, I present my bank statement.... :eek:
 
okashira said:
Even a supposed shockwave can't travel faster then the speed of light.
The theory of relativity extents to even dictate that information can't travel faster then the speed of light, let alone waves or particles.
Click to expand...

eBills travel faster than light. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top