Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Particles Moved Faster Than Speed of Light?
National Geographic ^ | September 23, 2011 | Ker Than

Posted on 09/24/2011 6:19:59 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets

Neutrinos—ghostly subatomic particles—may have been observed traveling faster than the speed of light, scientists announced this week.

If confirmed, the astonishing claim would upend a cardinal rule of physics established by Albert Einstein nearly a century ago.

"Most theorists believe that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. So if this is true, it would rock the foundations of physics," said Stephen Parke, head of the theoretical physics department at the U.S. government-run Fermilab near Chicago, Illinois.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalgeographic.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Science; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: einstein; fermilab; neutrinos; physics; speedoflight; stringtheory; superluminous
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last
There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy...

"The science is [never] settled."

I like the Einstein as Ptolemy analogy. Ptolemy was a great scientist, one of the greatest who ever lived. People who have no understanding of his achievements casually dismiss him. Will people five hundred years from now be casually dismissing Einstein?

I find it provocative that they are relying on GPS as the common timing signal. And the law of large numbers to reduce the timing errors...

I'll go out on a limb and say that it's more likely that they detect a timing bias than that they overturn Special Relativity.

The most refreshing part of the article is the scientists determination to air their results and disclose their methods, rather than act like those dorks at the CRU. Scientists are not supposed to have all the answers, they are supposed to ask the right questions and ask them honestly.

1 posted on 09/24/2011 6:20:07 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
yeah. you know, the particles that they theorize exist.
2 posted on 09/24/2011 6:22:03 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (...then they came for the guitars, and we kicked their sorry faggot asses into the dust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Like Obama when he smells a wallet


3 posted on 09/24/2011 6:23:28 AM PDT by evad (Obama needs to show us his green card)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I remember reading about them in Scientific American in the late Sixties. As Tachyon Neutrinos lose energy, they increase their speed. Back in the Sixties it was hypothesized that, some tachyons, having collided with so many other sub-atomic particles, were going so fast, THEY WERE EVERYWHERE,,,ALLTHE TIME!


4 posted on 09/24/2011 6:25:18 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

They are measuring an effect that travels faster than light, apparently. Information is not supposed to travel between two points faster than the speed of light (Quantum entanglement may or may not be an exception. You might view quantum entanglement as something like the phase velocity of light, which can travel faster than the speed of light but cannot carry information between two points faster than the speed of light.)


5 posted on 09/24/2011 6:29:01 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Science has always been a fascinating topic. Full agreement ... "The science is [never] settled." for the ultimate scientist is not of this world, and His comprehension and creativity will never belong to humans. The possibilities being infinite, and the discoveries being so finitely small will constantly leave room for a constant to no longer be constant.
6 posted on 09/24/2011 6:34:15 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: evad

0bama can spend money faster than the speed of light?


7 posted on 09/24/2011 6:38:39 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open ( <o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
299,792, 458 meters/second seems relatively slow
8 posted on 09/24/2011 6:42:40 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew (minds change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
You might view quantum entanglement as something like the phase velocity of light, which can travel faster than the speed of light but cannot carry information between two points faster than the speed of light.)

I view it as Horseshit 2.0.

9 posted on 09/24/2011 6:48:32 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (...then they came for the guitars, and we kicked their sorry faggot asses into the dust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra

How can something travel faster if it’s losing energy?


10 posted on 09/24/2011 6:49:32 AM PDT by wastedyears (Attaaack Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Not only that, but they can anticipate how much money he wants to spend on a certain thing, too.


11 posted on 09/24/2011 6:52:01 AM PDT by wastedyears (Attaaack Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Neutrinos may have been observed traveling faster than the speed of light.

Naw those were just Obama's falling ratings you saw.

12 posted on 09/24/2011 7:03:37 AM PDT by Rapscallion (This administration is so bad even their corruption is incompetent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

Be careful not to dismiss what you do not understand. Think how General Relativity must have appeared to the layman in 1919. Yet it made predictions that could be verified. In fact, the operation of the GPS constellation is dependent on General Relativity. Transistors take advantage quantum mechanics, specifically quantum mechanical tunneling.

There are more things in Heaven and Earth ....


13 posted on 09/24/2011 7:04:16 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: no-to-illegals

I like John Derbyshire’s analogy of the universe of knowledge as a vast dark place, and all of our modern science shining a small circle of light around a tiny patch, bright nearest to the light (Newtonian mechanics, for instance), but very dim at the edges, and only illuminating the smallest corner.


14 posted on 09/24/2011 7:10:09 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

“How can something travel faster if it’s losing energy?”

“One curious effect is that, unlike ordinary particles, the speed of a tachyon increases as its energy decreases. In particular, E is zero when v is infinity. (For ordinary bradyonic matter, E increases with increasing speed, becoming arbitrarily large as v approaches c, the speed of light). Therefore, just as baryons are forbidden to break the light-speed barrier, so too are tachyons forbidden from slowing down to below c, because infinite energy is required to reach the barrier from either above or below.”


15 posted on 09/24/2011 7:15:28 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

So how does light know the speed of it’s origin without a limiting medium? This has always been my issue with a set speed of light. When my spaceship is going .5C and I turn on my headlights, how do the light particles “know” what the current speed is? Further, all speed is measured based on relative position . In a swirling universe, how exactly does one go about defining the null? Light in space doesn’t have medium constrict is like sound does on earth.


16 posted on 09/24/2011 7:18:17 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Heck, ask Scotty. He knows he can push the Enterprise to warp factor 9, but just for a bit. The dylithium crystals overheat.


17 posted on 09/24/2011 7:22:41 AM PDT by SkyDancer (A critic is like a legless man who teaches running.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Okay...

So, Einstein’s theories and the speed of light may not be “settled science”, but, global warming is settled science and unchallengeable.

(Sorry if off-topic).


18 posted on 09/24/2011 7:24:53 AM PDT by adorno (<)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Maybe he should’ve used Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator.


19 posted on 09/24/2011 7:29:28 AM PDT by wastedyears (Attaaack Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

These neutrino things sound like what are shot out from some lab around Chicago and that they attempt to collect an underground lab in Ely, MN. We didn’t tour the lab but did tour the mine and there was some information, plus the guy that took us down into the mine told us about the Chicago to Ely thing while we were squashed into the car waiting for the one above (or was it below) us to load. We rode down into the mine just the way the miners did was a long ride, close to a mile(I think, it’s been awhile).
The lab itself only has tours one time during the day and we got there to late for that.


20 posted on 09/24/2011 7:31:42 AM PDT by tickles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

CERN scientists ‘break the speed of light’
The Telegraph | Sept. 22, 2011 | Uncredited
Posted on 09/22/2011 6:57:08 PM PDT by danielmryan
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2782478/posts


21 posted on 09/24/2011 7:37:10 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
While knowledge is the basis of facts, facts are always elusive and nearly never conclusive. Humanity is a wanderers voyage, and few ever gain knowledge to secure a place to fully understand said voyage (through the eye of the needle?). Have heard death grants a particular knowledge, though who wants or desires death if knowledge is the quest of life, and life exists for the quest? If death is not the answer to attainment of all knowledge, then why do people worship at the alter of death? Would go on and on, but words are boring. Death would tell us, more than likely, there is an ongoing quest by life for living. Pray I didn't bore you, for opinions are all which are known till a life altering event or death, and there maybe is an option number three? Life is three dimensional or perhaps four or five dimensional, so questions maybe are our ultimate quest, if knowledge is contained in the questioning? (imho and smiles)
22 posted on 09/24/2011 7:49:32 AM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; bvw; callisto; ckilmer; dandelion; ganeshpuri89; gobucks; KevinDavis; Las Vegas Dave; ...

Thanks Lonesome in Massachussets.

Some more about the earlier topic.


· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·

23 posted on 09/24/2011 7:49:35 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Hi - well it wasn’t being sold on Amazon yet. How you doing?


24 posted on 09/24/2011 7:50:01 AM PDT by SkyDancer (A critic is like a legless man who teaches running.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
So how does light know the speed of it’s origin without a limiting medium?

I see in you the makings of a great scientist. That is the kind of question Einstein asked. Maxwell's equations, which are very useful in describing electromagnetics, predict, or at least account for, the speed of light in terms of two independently measurable quantities, the permittivity and permeability of space.

Before Special Relativity, scientists recognized that this speed (as you perceived) must be referred to some medium in which the light waves travel. Effort was expended to find out what this medium was. The most famous and best experiment was the Michelson-Morley attempt to measure the speed of the earth through the "luminescent ether". The earth moves around the sun at 18 km/sec. Attempts to detect a difference of 36 km/sec in the speed of light, or any difference in speed, depending on direction, failed completely.

What was going on?

Einstein showed that one could get consistent results by abandoning an absolute frame of reference and the notion of absolute time, if all [inertial] reference frames were treaty equally. This required adopting some counter-intuitive ideas, but lead to a consistent laws of physics. One counter intuitive result was the lengths of objects in relative motion changed along the direction of motion. May I recommend A.P. French's very readable Special Relativity, for a more complete answer to your question?

25 posted on 09/24/2011 7:51:53 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: adorno

Not a all off-topic, but completely on point. The “laws of physics” are about as settled as science ever gets, which means, none-too-settled. To claim that AGWT is “settled science” is to betray ignorance of the entire enterprise of science.


26 posted on 09/24/2011 8:02:40 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

So, if the speed limit for ‘things’ in our spacetime is the speed of light, if a ‘thing’ is moving faster than the speed limit that ‘thing’ is no longer existing in our spacetime ... if not a timing bias, perhaps a bias toward what is Time? To this point in human History, there have been no observations of anything that has not already occurred, so would this ‘phenomenon’ being reproted be approaching observation of a current —that’s a present, not past— event? BWahahhahahaha, science is so much fun.


27 posted on 09/24/2011 8:42:20 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

How do you detect something moving faster than light? I’m not sceptical, just curious.


28 posted on 09/24/2011 8:44:23 AM PDT by AD from SpringBay (We deserve the government we allow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: AD from SpringBay

IIRC, the feat is accomplished by measuring the interval from emission to detection and comparing that ‘time interval’ to how fast the two events would occur at light speed in a vacuum. It’s kind of like mathematically showing the Sun has a greater radius than the surface area would indicate if using the Euclidian equation for finding the surface area given the radius, or finding the radius of a spherical object given the surface area. Richard Feynman gave an amusing lecture on this topic in his Caltech lectures.


29 posted on 09/24/2011 8:52:48 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets; SunkenCiv

30 posted on 09/24/2011 9:07:25 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog
"0bama can spend money faster than the speed of light?"

Well, the short answer is YES.

Like the speed of light, from the time Obama's brain senses a wallet, the synapses close and the signal to remove said wallet is GREATER than the speed of light.

He also deal in figures that like the speed of light are unimaginable...like TRILLIONS and if he ever figgr's out what comes after a trillion, God help us all.

31 posted on 09/24/2011 10:08:12 AM PDT by evad (Obama needs to show us his green card)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Scientists have a great faith to follow... They have faith in science...


32 posted on 09/24/2011 10:12:16 AM PDT by ColdSteelTalon (Light is fading to shadow, and casting its shroud over all we have known...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Ernst Mach observed that Newton's law of motion reduce, trivially, to a definition of time. Which does not mean they are useless, we can predict simultaneous events, like a rocket ship and an asteriod meeting in space.

The idea of the defintion of time is actually quite profound, and not at all easily answered. In physics, time arises from the observation of sequential events, the interval between them being "time". Up until 1967, time was defined by gravity, as reckoned from the observation of astronomical events. The timescale arising from these observations was called "Ephemeris Time" or ET. It was the most uniform and accurate timescale known. In 1967, time, or more properly, the second, was redefined in terms of a quantum electromagnetic phenomenon, specific the band gap energy of a certain transition of the Cesium atom, giving rise to a timescale now called TAI. (International Atomic Time or Temps Atomique Internationale)

The remarkable thing is, that within the accuracy of our ability to measure, there is absolutely no inconsistency between ET (now replaced by TD or TDB, for Dynamical Time or Barycentric Dynamical Time) and TAI. In other words, either the cesium atom "knows" what the planets are doing, or the planets know what the cesium atom is doing, or events associated with both are progressing in response to a thing called "time".

33 posted on 09/24/2011 10:12:52 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro

I say the ring laser gyro is the spookiest, and cleverest, use of General Relativity. GPS would work with or without General Relativity. Actually, General Relativitistic effects are a nuisance to the designers of GPS, while it is the very basis of the ring laser gyro.


34 posted on 09/24/2011 10:20:25 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ColdSteelTalon

“Science” with a capital “S” is a religion and a matter of faith for people like Al Gore and Barak Obama, who have no idea what it is they are talking about. Real science is nothing more than the systematic and honest examination of experience. Some of the mathematical technique is quite abstract and takes some getting used to, admittedly.

In chosing one’s faith in scientists, you have to be careful Chose scientists who can predict eclipses and built GPS constellations and who are open to examination and refutation. Be wary of any who make unprovable claims or reject challenges to their theirs and will not disclose their methods and data.


35 posted on 09/24/2011 10:28:20 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

What is the speed of dark?


36 posted on 09/24/2011 10:31:29 AM PDT by tweakDU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Einstein should have said "the science is settled" and we wouldn't have to deal with all this experimental nonsense.
37 posted on 09/24/2011 10:31:55 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Palin is coming, and the Tea Party is coming with her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tweakDU
What is the speed of dark?

Only Steven Wright knows for sure.

38 posted on 09/24/2011 10:35:06 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Palin is coming, and the Tea Party is coming with her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Einstein should have said "the science is settled" and we wouldn't have to deal with all this experimental nonsense.

We are not amused.


39 posted on 09/24/2011 10:47:15 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tweakDU
What is the speed of dark?

There is no dark, only places the light has not reached yet.

40 posted on 09/24/2011 10:48:31 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Can we ask questions which God finds unanswerable? Easily. All nonsense questions are unanswerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
In other words, either the cesium atom "knows" what the planets are doing, or the planets know what the cesium atom is doing, or events associated with both are progressing in response to a thing called "time". So how do we explain the 'null path/state' of a photon crossing the universe yet carrying the present time imprint of when the photon was emitted, arriving at an observer and giving the observer a reading on the state of the source way back when the photon was emitted? I would contend that dimension TIME has similar expressions to what dimension SPACE is fashioned (linear, planar, volumetric). Perhaps our soul exists in present temporal alignment (planar present?), so it can 'sense' what occurs and gets processed by the bodily senses tuned to record past (linear past) events? ... I know, I know, it's an awkward way to express a new concept, but my limitations are language based. My point is that dimension TIME may beimagined as a 'volume', but that volume is composed of 'linear' and 'planar' arrangement. To God the Creator, all of TIME is occurring at the same just as all of SPACE is 'in' the 'bubble' we call spacetime.
41 posted on 09/24/2011 12:34:33 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tweakDU

What is the flipside of a coin? ... The speed of dark is limited by how quickly light leaves a location.


42 posted on 09/24/2011 12:36:29 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: tweakDU

Can you give an example of somewhere/when in our universe where there is no electromagnetic radiation and no virtual particle creation? There you could measure the speed of dark. And apparently, Steven Wright has been there ... his humor is often that dark, and hilarious. Do you suppose he wears his hair like a confused Einstein in order to convey some excentricity we might equate with ‘Mathematicians and Physicists’? What did the guy who came up with ‘e’ look like?


43 posted on 09/24/2011 12:40:30 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
How about a Neutrino is really a tachyon traveling at its’ slowest possible speed and its’ theoretical mass is really a negative mass?

Not totally in our spatial and temporal reference frame, but not totally out of it.

44 posted on 09/24/2011 1:00:10 PM PDT by The Cajun (Palin, Free Republic, Mark Levin, Rush, Hannity......Nuff said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
This is very interesting. The whole experiment was an attempt to gather information on neutrino oscillations and they find this.
I would assume that the particle never travels faster than c. The question was why and how a neutrino can transform into different particles (electron, muon, and tau). I'd guess the speed/time discrepancy in these experiments would be related to the particle changes themselves. In transforming from an electron to a muon there must be either a superpostioned state where both exist or the wavefunction itself collapses and is 'reborn'. The first is most likely the case. Superpositioned information is not ruled by relativity. "spooky action at a distance".
45 posted on 09/24/2011 3:32:07 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Not too bad I must say, gonna start a job at an auto parts place in Manhattan on Monday. Kinda excited about it.

How are things Down Under?


46 posted on 09/24/2011 6:52:46 PM PDT by wastedyears (Attaaack Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: allmost
The question was why and how a neutrino can transform into different particles (electron, muon, and tau).

Neutrinos don't transform into electrons, muons or tauons. According to our experimental observations, and also according to the theoretical Standard Model (i.e., the currently accepted model of elementary particles based on the Weinberg-Salam model), there are three types of neutrinos, each mathematically "partnered" with one of the three basic leptons (i.e., electrons, muons and tauons). Thus there are electron-type neutrinos, muon-type neutrinos and tau-type neutrinos. The neutrinos are all electrically neutral, whereas their partner particles all have non-vanishing charge. Neutrino oscillations occur when a neutrino of one the three types transforms into a neutrino of one of the other types.

Superpositioned information is not ruled by relativity. "spooky action at a distance".

Quantum states that are ordinary superposition states (these are superpositions of so-called "basis" states) exhibit dynamics that are indeed constrained by special relativity (i.e., their dynamical equations are Lorentz invariant). So-called "spooky action at a distance" has to do with what are called "entangled" states - these are special types of superposition states that have the property that they can't be factored into distinct basis states. Their dynamics are also explicitly constrained by Lorentz invariance.

Lorentz invariance is an essential mathematical building block of what is called "quantum field theory" (QFT), which is the principal mathematical tool used to compute predictions regarding elementary particles. There are (literally) millions of verified predictions from experiments carried out over the past 50 years that are all consistent with QFT, and thus consistent with the assumption of Lorentz invariance.

The only experimental evidence ever produced by professional experimental physicists that suggests a violation of Lorentz invariance is the recent announcement regarding the CERN-Gran Sasso "time-of-flight" measurement. If the recently announced measurement is indeed correct, it means that Lorentz invariant QFT is "wrong" in a fundamental way, and needs to be replaced (not just modified, since Lorentz invariance is mathematically embedded everywhere in QFT), and yet, it has somehow produced literally millions of other results that are all nevertheless correct. Thus it is considered by most of us to be highly unlikely that QFT is wrong, and it is more likely that this experimental claim is mistaken.

Most of us suspect that there is a deeply hidden experimental error (since this experiment is comprised of millions of separate experimental parts, and the number of possibilities for error is combinatorically gigantic) but we are waiting with open minds. Spectacular claims need spectacular evidence: this experiment needs to be independently replicated, and then we will see what is what.

47 posted on 09/24/2011 10:04:54 PM PDT by E8crossE8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: E8crossE8
Pull your head out of your a$$. You spout/steal text but have no understanding of any of the basic underlying theories.

Okay. Explain wavefunction collapse to the rest of the thread please. If not explain your personal theory as to how one particle can transform into another.
48 posted on 09/24/2011 10:15:47 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: E8crossE8

The fact is we are beyond experimental dogma here. You might have to think instead of parrot words in response.


49 posted on 09/24/2011 10:18:13 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Actually, this is my field, and what I wrote was extemporaneous. Your reply is somewhat surprising - it is too bad for you that you are so angry. I hope you don’t take it out on your family. Best wishes.


50 posted on 09/24/2011 10:21:08 PM PDT by E8crossE8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson