Gone in 60 nanoseconds - ( Faster than light possible? )

WaPo ^ | October 6, 2011 | Charles Krauthammer

[re_tail20]

“We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” says the bartender.

A neutrino walks into a bar.

— Joke circulating on the Internet

The world as we know it is on the brink of disintegration, on the verge of dissolution. No, I’m not talking about the collapse of the euro, of international finance, of the Western economies, of the democratic future, of the unipolar moment, of the American dream, of French banks, of Greece as a going concern, of Europe as an idea, of Pax Americana — the sinews of a postwar world that feels today to be unraveling.

I am talking about something far more important. Which is why it made only the back pages of your newspaper, if it made it at all. Scientists at CERN, the European high-energy physics consortium, have announced the discovery of a particle that can travel faster than light.

Neutrinos fired 454 miles from a supercollider outside Geneva to an underground laboratory in Gran Sasso, Italy, took less time (60 nanoseconds less) than light to get there. Or so the physicists think. Or so they measured. Or so they have concluded after checking for every possible artifact and experimental error.

The implications of such a discovery are so mind-boggling, however, that these same scientists immediately requested that other labs around the world try to replicate the experiment. Something must have been wrong — some faulty measurement, some overlooked contaminant — to account for a result that, if we know anything about the universe, is impossible.

And that’s the problem. It has to be impossible because, if not, if that did happen on this Orient Express hurtling between Switzerland and Italy, then everything we know about the universe is wrong.

[mlo]

"cosmology will be affected hugely. distances are measured/calculated assuming light speed is constant. And E=Mc^2 needs to be rethought/modified."

How is any of that brought into question? The experiment didn't show light going faster.

[mlo]

"Even if faster than light travel is possible, this isn’t true. It’s hyperbole. Was everything we knew about the universe wrong when Newton was proved wrong? No. We still follow him, in the limited shpere where he applies (i.e. inbetween atoms and planets), like we’ve done since the 17th century."

Exactly. People like to talk about throwing out everything we know when there's some suprising develpment. It's nonsense.

"We’ve stuck with Einstein despite his system being overturned by quantum physics, which some people date to five years before his development of the Special Theory of Relativity."

A correction to this though. Quantum physics did not overturn relativity. Both theories have been tested to extreme degrees and both are accepted foundational theories of physics. They just don't have much overlap.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

How is any of that brought into question? The experiment didn't show light going faster.

c being constant is now called into question.....c a constant and/or a speed limit is probably a localized or special phenomena by implication.

[aruanan]

Gone in 60 nanoseconds - ( Faster than light possible? )

Gravity, though not waves in gravity, is faster than light. A device that detects the gravity of the sun will indicate a location in the sky where the sun actually is, rather than where it appears to be, which would not be the case if solar gravity were no speedier than the light coming from the sun.

[Larry Lucido]

Neutrinos fired

After they were fired, they showed up at "Occupy Wall Street" within 60 nanoseconds.

[JoeFromSidney]

The fundamental axiom of Einstein’s theory of relativity is the absolute prohibition on speed faster than light.

Not quite correct. The fundamental axiom of Einstein's theory is that the speed of light is the same for all observers, regardless of their velocity. The speed of light as a speed limit is a consequence of this constancy. Should this experiment with neutrinos turn out to be correct, we'd have to go back and examine whether different observers (moving at different velocities) measure different values for the speed of light.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

...if that did happen on this Orient Express hurtling between Switzerland and Italy, then everything we know about the universe is wrong.

Stand by, film at 11:00...

Regards,
GtG

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

The speed of light is inviolable. The science is settled. Deniers.

                    C

Not just a good idea, It's the law!

Regards,
GtG

[TheOldLady]

Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!

Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly

Planning to donate $10 or more? You can sponsor
one or more New Monthly Donors for no additional cost
FReepmail TheOldLady

[mlo]

"c being constant is now called into question....."

It doesn't call C being a constant into question. It only suggests that some things that aren't light might exceed that constant. We don't actually know what the implications might be because nobody has worked out a theory yet that would explain these observations (and they probably won't because this won't hold up), but there's nothing about them that require doubting the constancy of the speed of light and there have been a great many other experiments that have already confirmed it.

[mlo]

"Gravity, though not waves in gravity, is faster than light. A device that detects the gravity of the sun will indicate a location in the sky where the sun actually is, rather than where it appears to be, which would not be the case if solar gravity were no speedier than the light coming from the sun."

Gravity isn't instantaneous either.

[aruanan]

Gravity isn't instantaneous either.

No, but some 25 times the speed of light is pretty stinking fast. For practical purposes, as far as satellites and space flight is concerned, though, gravity is treated as instantaneous.