MERGED: Pillar of Physics challenged

[fritzd]

---

I've read this article here. And it fascinates me. If ila ni ma prove, what does this mean? Usab tanang law nila about sa universe?

"Faster than light" particles threaten Einstein | Science Headlines | Comcast.net

Of course not! Relativity is a theory, not a LAW!! We all know it works very well for the macroscopic universe but not for the subatomic world! Neutrinos are subatomic particles and what they are trying to see here is an interplay between the macroscopic universe and the quantum world. I would say this would give us hints to new kinds of physics that will bridge the gap of both worlds and hopefully bring us closer to a grand unified theory!

I really find it annoying that most people are going crazy about these new findings and that it maybe Einstein was wrong. No, he wasn't. He knew that Relativity had limitations that's why in the last years of his life he was searching for the grand unified theory but of course he didn't succeed. It's like Newton's laws. When quantum theory and relativity came out, we knew that Newton's laws were only applicable to certain cases

So in the end, we will get closer to understanding how the really universe works. Our theories are mere approximations to what we can perceive of our environment. Each decade we refine these theories to provide better approximations. And as we formulate, reformulate and extend theories, we will end up with better theory.

Anyway, other detectors still need to confirm the findings. I'm not really that worried or excited. I will be more excited if we can really confirm string theory through these findings.

[cebugdev]

even if this is proven right,
time travel will still not be possible..

Time travel to the future maybe
but travelling back in time?
unless they can negate the speed of light backwards then it will be,
but who keeps the record of the happenings of times? what i ment is the reference
to each events in a timeline? hmmm.. imposible

[miyay]

time travel would be nice the physical laws of the universe are permanent, it is just we as the observer and our tools for observation that are evolving...

[rodsky]

Here is a conversation I had with a well-known, award winning Filipina astrophysicist I had yesterday. I won't mention her name because I forgot to ask her permission if I can post our convo, but here is basically what we talked about:

(ME) "Hi ____! ...wanted to know your thoughts on the recent "neutrinos going FTL" hoopla. I'm curious that, if proven to be false, what would have been more likely--an instrumentation error, a calculation error? Both? Thanks!

Hi Rodion, sure. (We) think the most likely explanation is "systematics", some effect (instrumental or physical) that they have not taken into account or are not taking into account correctly. I haven't looked at the details of this particular experiment but most expts and observations have nontrivial systematics; the raw measurements are corrected for systematic effects with corresponding systematic uncertainties. So what is likely is that there is an effect that has not been taken into account. For an experiment of this caliber, it is unlikely to be either a "simple" instrument or calculation error, but of course it could be a "stupid" mistake, in which case someone will be in trouble.

This is of course, her opinion, but as someone who eats black hole theory for breakfast, she was in a position to know and explain what the possible sources of error are, and I think her answer is quite informative.

-RODION

[chairmankaga]

If this is true then, Einstein would be rolling in his grave.


I just remembered, i've seen a documentary before about something like this and he was able to send music file at a speed exceeding the speed of light. This was years ago..

[TwoStepsFromHeLL]

maghuwat jud ko sa updates ani. kung tinood man jud gani na or na prove na jud nila tru expirements, basin possibly na guro ang space travel which is light years away. @@

[fritzd]

This really has nothing to do with Einstein being wrong. It just means we are advancing in fundamental understanding of our universe.

If read through the comments here Do neutrinos move faster than the speed of light? - physicsworld.com , you'll find some very intelligent discussions from physicists around the world.

This one I like in particular. Comment number 8

"Electro-weak force
Special Relativity describes an O(3,1) geometry. It is based on experiments conducted on photons in a flat spacetime.

Deviations from the basic assumptions of that geometry would indicate that we would be wrong to use it for the neutrino.

It would mean that electromagnetic and weak spaces do not 'mesh', and would manifest as a force additional to the electromagnetic force over large distances."

[THE SKULLS]

very possible. time to regenerate.

[personalmgt]

[kleinski23]

Q. What is being reported?

A. Over the past two years, Europeans scientists shot more than 15,000 particles called neutrinos from Geneva through Earth's crust to an underground lab 454 miles away in Italy. They found that the particles appeared to travel just a tiny bit faster than the speed of light — just 20 parts per million faster. That was a surprise because the speed of light, about 186,000 miles per second, is supposed to be the fastest anything can move.

Q. Why has this caused such a stir?

A. It threatens Einstein's special theory of relativity, a bedrock of modern physics that Albert Einstein produced in 1905. That theory sets the speed of light as the cosmic speed limit for material objects, although it's better known for the equation E equals mc2, which basically says mass and energy can be changed into each other. If that theory is proven wrong, it could dramatically shake up our understanding of basic laws of the universe.

Q. And would that affect my daily life?

A. Not for now. It's impossible to say what unknown physical effects might be exploited, and how. The findings — even if proven — may end up as nothing more than a footnote in physics textbooks, or they could lead to new technological breakthroughs. As one skeptic jokingly said, if it's real, people "could use `neutrinomail' rather than email. It's faster."

Q. How likely is it that this finding is correct?

A. Experts are skeptical. Einstein's relativity theory has withstood a lot of experimental tests over the years. The scientists who reported the finding say they're still looking for flaws in their experimental procedures, and they've asked other labs to try to duplicate the results.

Q. What kind of flaws could there be?

A. The measurement is very complex, and all kinds of factors can enter in. For example, when the results were formally presented at a seminar Friday, a scientist in the audience suggested that the position of the moon could make a difference, because its gravity can deform the terrestrial crust through which the neutrinos passed. A spokesman for the researchers said that didn't appear to be a problem.

Q. So what happens now?

A. Scientists at Fermilab in Illinois have already started planning their own experiment. They have some experience. In 2007, they got a similar result, but the margin of error in their measurements was too big to make a definitive claim.


Gee Whizzz! Basics on faster-than-light research | Science Headlines | Comcast.net