Jump to content

Welcome to Rune Tips, the first ever RuneScape help site. We aim to offer skill guides, quest guides, maps, calculators, informative databases, tips, and much more to help you get the most from the Massive Online Adventure Game, RuneScape, by Jagex Ltd © 2009.

Report Ad

Welcome to Forum.Tip.It
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

CERN Experiment Indicates Faster-Than-Light neutrinos


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#21
Will H
[ Display Name History ]

Will H

    Tea Connoisseur

  • Members
  • 5,195 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Blighty
  • Joined:13 August 2006
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Will Holmes
  • Clan:Clay Gods
When a tau hits your eye like a subatomic pie, that's neutrino...

I'm skeptical, but really really hopeful that it's true. It's about time we had a proper shakeup of the known scientific model, Einstein's been the last word for too long.

~ W ~


Posted Image


#22
kamykazee
[ Display Name History ]

kamykazee

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 340 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:23 October 2005
  • RuneScape Status:None

When a tau hits your eye like a subatomic pie, that's neutrino...

I'm skeptical, but really really hopeful that it's true. It's about time we had a proper shakeup of the known scientific model, Einstein's been the last word for too long.


Actually, if i understood correctly, Quantum Mechanics was the most recently universally adopted theory. General Relativity explained things on a large scale and Quantum Mechanics proved very successful at explaining things at a microscopic scale. These two, Eintein's General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, were at odds for some time since they couldn't explain things that were both small but incredibly massive. That's where String Theory (and more recently M-Theory) came into play and tried to unify it (i got that from Brian Greene's books :P)

I'm not sure where this discovery would fit with these if proven to be true, but i've seen some pretty convincing arguments that made me highly doubt it's veridicity aswell.

Posted Image


#23
The Dark Lord
[ Display Name History ]

The Dark Lord

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 6,517 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:8 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • Clan:S.W.A.G.
What if the neutrinos did arrive early but did NOT actually travel faster than the speed of light? What if they just used a shortcut through space (i.e. something like a wormhole)?
SWAG

Mayn U wanna be like me but U can't be me cuz U ain't got ma swagga on.

#24
kamykazee
[ Display Name History ]

kamykazee

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 340 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:23 October 2005
  • RuneScape Status:None
Yes, that's one idea being thrown about - that the neutrino took a shortcut through another dimension. Here's a few more ideas to spark interest:

(1) Based on current understanding it means that the neutrino has negative mass. It could possibly account for the expansion of the universe if it's found that each neutrino has a very slightly repulsive effect on all matter in the universe.

(2) If it has positive mass and still travels faster than the speed of light, then it'll overturn... um... every equation with the number "c" in it, not the least of which will be E=mc2.

(3) If it's a measurement error that has been confirmed to this degree, then it will tell us something about our current understanding of metrology and measurement sciences. Remember that this result was first reported by MINOS in 2007, this is a confirmation experiment.

Keep in mind that these folks compensated for CONTINENTAL FREAKIN' DRIFT! I hardly think they forgot time dilation and special relativity effects.

Posted Image


#25
PoorLepRecon
[ Display Name History ]

PoorLepRecon

    Dragon Rider

  • Members
  • 5,028 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Green Hill Zone
  • Joined:14 August 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN '07:Shruiken
An interesting discovery. Kind of exciting if it holds to be true.

Forum Updates & Suggestions <------ Let your voice be heard!
Forum Games <------- Coolest place on Tip.It
Tip.It Forum Rules <------- Read them!


#26
ranqe
[ Display Name History ]

ranqe

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 401 posts
what does c in e=mc2 stand for again? i forgot

your such a mother [bleep]er. whats with all this bombchu [cabbage]? all everyone who likes this [cabbage] is stupid. ur a [bleep]ing cheater. u did that the wrong way, thats not how to get past the king zora u cheater. u suck and i wont continue watching all ur [cabbage]! videos

he mad?

#27
Vezon Dash
[ Display Name History ]

Vezon Dash

    Black Knight Trainer

  • Members
  • 3,276 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:12 December 2008
  • RuneScape Status:None

what does c in e=mc2 stand for again? i forgot


C is the speed of light being used as the terminal speed of all objects.

#28
pal2002
[ Display Name History ]

pal2002

    Scorpion Pit

  • Members
  • 541 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Thine alabaster cities gleam, Undimmed by human tears
  • Joined:21 June 2004
  • RuneScape Status:None
Poor Einstein - and poor me for just having taken relativity - and now that's proved to be totally wrong if this actually turns out to be true.

Still in for the Europeans making stupid mistake somewhere and result can't be replicated elsewhere.
I would prefer even to fail with honor than to win by cheating - Sophocles
Posted Image

#29
i_love_burritos
[ Display Name History ]

i_love_burritos

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,668 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:31-December 08
  • Joined:22 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
Just so you all realize, this is a huge claim, which requires some very very hard evidence. (why most scientists are taking the side of skepticism right now)

Here's the paper if anyone feels like wading through it. General and Special relativity have been PROVEN for the last 100 years to be empirically true, and Einstein's theories aren't just going to be invalidated with this result. Understand that if a particle did happen to travel faster than the speed of light, it be a quantum (hurrrr) shift in current model of physics. Newtonian physics wasn't laid to waste over a period of 20 years when Einstein developed special and general relativity, it's just that it literally changed our way of thinking about the universe.

The current position that the CERN scientists have taken (from what I've read) is "uhhh we don't know what the [bleep] to think about this, everyone here? yeah let's just talk." They use GPS satellites to get somewhat accurate measurement - however got a 10ns error. Found that the neutrinos were travelling about ~0.0025% faster and got a 6sigma standard deviation. That's a +/- 0.0004% error. Most likely a "systematic error".

If it was an accurate result then, physicists are going to be studying this for generations. (The project took 3 years, they're not going to replicate it so easy.)

Also, c is a hard limit, meaning that either (particles can go faster than the speed of light and light is being impeded by something - ridiculous). Also look at :

http://en.wikipedia....rley_experiment

#30
RpgGamer
[ Display Name History ]

RpgGamer

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 9,214 posts
nifty. But....why would it pose such a problem according to the one quote?
Posted Image


Anyone who likes tacos is incapable of logic.

Anyone who likes logic is incapable of tacos.




PSA: SaqPrets is an Estonian Dude
Steam: NippleBeardTM
Origin: Brand_New_iPwn

#31
i_love_burritos
[ Display Name History ]

i_love_burritos

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,668 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:31-December 08
  • Joined:22 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
Why is it such a problem ? Well, [cabbage]. I can't really answer that, but imagine if you had a rule known to be true (through many trials and observations) and then you found an exception to that rule.

Wouldn't be a "rule" any more really. Why this is a problem...

The Special and General Theories of Relativity (I stole this from google)


If you read all that, it states that :

1.) The laws of physics are the same for all non-accelerating observers.
2.) The speed of light in vacuum is independent of the motion of all observers and sources, and is observed to have the same value.

If you found something that can go faster than light it would violate the theory of relativity. Then you go into all types of scenarios with particles that have imaginary mass, can go backwards in time etc etc etc. I'm not too sure of the details but essentially it'd be a headache for everyone. I'll have to do more reading.

The talk is here : http://cdsweb.cern.c.../1384486?ln=en.

EDIT:

From my last post, add in a couple of zeros behind the error margin. The people working on that OPERA project apparently have checked/ rechecked and examined every real source of a possible error and still get a 6 sigma significance value. (The chance that their results are wrong are about 6 standard deviations away from the expected, i.e. it's about a 1 in billion chance that they've done something wrong - which is why they're asking other physicists now. Looks like it might actually be valid.)

Also in the paper they said the fired around 16,000 neutrinos (16,000 events, with around 10^20 proton events) to try and eliminate any STATISTICAL error. Since these are really small, really fast, particles it's quite hard to measure each individually so they're using a statistical method - a probability density function of a distribution of events (i.e. the neutrinos arriving at a point, in a certain amount of time. Note the blind calibrations.)

They've even attempted to separate the arrival of the neutrinos based on their energy dependence (high vs low) and haven't found any difference haha. (All the things I've said come from page 3 and 7, figures 4, 8, 13 and table 2.)

also, tl;dr speed of light tied up with many other constants such as the passage of time, the concept of time and space itself.

#32
Dheginsea
[ Display Name History ]

Dheginsea

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Coast USA
  • Joined:13 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Dheginsea
Been waiting for ever for something like this to happen, always hated how light was #1.

Still I won't believe it until there is nothing reasonable that could account for the findings other than they go faster then the speed of light.
Posted Image

Maybe a president who didn't believe our soldiers were going to heaven, might be a little less willing to get them killed. ~ Bill Maher
Barrows drops: 2 Karil's Coifs (on double drop day)
92,150th person to 99 defense

#33
kamykazee
[ Display Name History ]

kamykazee

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 340 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:23 October 2005
  • RuneScape Status:None
Modern measurements of the speed of light are accurate to much less than 1 m/s. The size of the discrepancy is large, not small. That said, the first place to look is errors in the apparatus, but it must be subtle or it would have been detected already. The fact is that if we leave aside the systematic error as the most likely cause of this, this is the point where the search must be and surely will be centered by serious theorists long time before they even seriously consider something's wrong with relativity. (the media is a different matter, all newpapers I've seen have already decided "Einstein was wrong").

Here is one persons's thoughts on why the result is incorrect and how CERN made an embarassing mistake http://johncostella....ino-blunder.pdf

In short, it's conclusion is :

From the above, the OPERA result becomes 61 ns with a statistical uncertainty of 24 ns and a systematic uncertainty of 7 ns. Even if we were to take the systematic uncertainty to be accurate, this result is now within two standard errors, which disqualifies it as a “discovery”, rendering it simply “an interesting result”. Given the much tighter bounds that we have on the neutrino speed from other sources such as Supernova 1987A, one must conclude that OPERA has simply made a mistake, albeit a highly embarrassing one which has gathered international media coverage today.

Now that's just one persons's thoughts on it and it may very well be wrong, but still it's nice to finally have some opinions on where the error is.

Posted Image


#34
Nomrombom
[ Display Name History ]

Nomrombom

    Moss Giant Whipper

  • Members
  • 2,736 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US
  • Joined:28 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:None
  • RSN:Nomrombom
For all those doubting the results - do you honestly think CERN doesn't test and retest all these results? Wouldn't you think a massive, super-advanced organization like CERN would only report things it was pretty sure of? I agree this will need to be tested by others and proven more conclusively, but I do not doubt the validity of the results too much.
PM me for fitocracy invite

#35
RpgGamer
[ Display Name History ]

RpgGamer

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 9,214 posts
Posted Image
Posted Image


Anyone who likes tacos is incapable of logic.

Anyone who likes logic is incapable of tacos.




PSA: SaqPrets is an Estonian Dude
Steam: NippleBeardTM
Origin: Brand_New_iPwn

#36
The Dark Lord
[ Display Name History ]

The Dark Lord

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 6,517 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:8 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • Clan:S.W.A.G.

Posted Image


Haha, nice.

How could they do this?
SWAG

Mayn U wanna be like me but U can't be me cuz U ain't got ma swagga on.

#37
The Dark Lord
[ Display Name History ]

The Dark Lord

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 6,517 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:8 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • Clan:S.W.A.G.
Has anyone heard any news about this?
SWAG

Mayn U wanna be like me but U can't be me cuz U ain't got ma swagga on.

#38
i_love_burritos
[ Display Name History ]

i_love_burritos

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,668 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:31-December 08
  • Joined:22 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
nup. i just paraphrased what I had read / viewpoints of others. havent seen much since

#39
Golvellius
[ Display Name History ]

Golvellius

    Hobgoblin Killer

  • Members
  • 1,685 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:30 May 2005
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
Smells like quantum entanglement to me.
I doubt they were looking at the ejected nuetrino but an entangled partner in the vicinity of the detector.

Exclusive Legacy Mode Player

 

Golvellius.png


He just successfully trolled you with "courtesy" and managed to get a reaction out of you. Lol


#40
ilovecuttingyews
[ Display Name History ]

ilovecuttingyews

    Demon Vanquisher

  • Members
  • 2,008 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:31 October 2005
  • RuneScape Status:F2P
This is about all I've heard since the actual 'discovery'. Essentially, some physicists say that if neutrinos would have gone faster than c, they would have shed energy, in the form of other subatomic particles, until they slowed down to c.

http://www.popsci.co...nergy-along-way




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users