Neutrinos go trolling on

posted on November 18th, 2011, 12:09 pm

Current Story: BBC News - Neutrino experiment repeat at Cern finds same result

Twice now neutrinos have shown evidence of breaking the universal speed limit.

I'm looking forward to the results from the other experiments trying to verify the data.

Wouldn't it be funny if the LHC instead of solving the problems it is setting out to solve, instead made more problems by breaking some old ideas.

Previous story: BBC News - Speed-of-light results under scrutiny at Cern

posted on November 18th, 2011, 12:34 pm

if its done about the same time of day in the same direction the relative movement of the earth might have influenced the result and there are a lot of more of those things, if you don't know the movement of the facility you don't know the speed of the neutrinos so i still have my doubts even tho i think it wouldn't be unlikely if the speed of light can be broken

[Beef]

posted on November 18th, 2011, 3:43 pm

Last edited by Beef on November 18th, 2011, 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

One of the fundamental priciples of the universe is that eventually all science is proven either incorrect or incomplete.

This a fact that science itself has established. Simply claiming that because they don't match with accepted beliefs, then the new discoveries must be wrong is nothing else but ignorant prattle of people who don't want to let go of old norms which have had for all this time.

From a personal standpoint: I knew that E=mc[sup]2[/sup] was nonsence! It leaves behind too many unanswered questions, too many unknowns. The equation simply cannot explain extreme conditions!

posted on November 18th, 2011, 5:43 pm

Current Story: BBC News - Neutrino experiment repeat at Cern finds same result

Twice now neutrinos have shown evidence of breaking the universal speed limit.

I'm looking forward to the results from the other experiments trying to verify the data.

Wouldn't it be funny if the LHC instead of solving the problems it is setting out to solve, instead made more problems by breaking some old ideas.

Previous story: BBC News - Speed-of-light results under scrutiny at Cern

Not at all! It's fantastic! That means that the idea of science is working and that all those rediculous "knowitall"-guys on this planet get a punsh in their faces. This new find totally proofs how fragile our stand of knowledge is and that we are far away of understanding the world. I have a friend that was yelling out the sanctity of that light is the fastest speed - a NATURAL LAW (!). It filled me with joy to simply tell him he was wrong. We had hours of discussions going on! Absolutely delicious!

How you dare, creature, to set yourself as everlasting standard because your logic whispered you would become all-knowing in a far future.

posted on November 18th, 2011, 5:54 pm

erm jan i'm thinking you misread what i wrote. i'm perfectly open to new findings disproving the old findings, i said i would find it funny if that's what came of this.

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on November 18th, 2011, 5:59 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on November 18th, 2011, 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Oof, oh boy this took a long time to break  :lol:.

I encourage everybody here to do a bit of background research on the methods used and how such experiments are performed (as well as read the original paper if you have access). There are a lot of things that the popular news briefs did not mention or explain, instead focusing on "oh look, neutrinos faster than light" . For instance, the group should have seen both tau and muon neutrinos, but did not. One extremely important thing to realize is the disjunct between proof and repeatability in a non-scientific framework. The experiment has been repeatable only in CERN at this specific site - that is why the group published, but did not make claims and instead asked the scientific community to verify or try to find some systematic error.

@ Beef, one of the major misconceptions to the public is that E=mc[sup]2[/sup] is applicable in all instances: that's only true if momentum is 0.

EDIT: also should mention that the experiment wasn't designed to be highly accurate for time measurements, because that's not what they were measuring 

posted on November 18th, 2011, 6:26 pm

dominus you sound like a pissed off scientist.



you may get that obvious reference, but lets see if you remember this one:



the second paragraph of the article i posted began with "If confirmed by other experiments", results are pending elsewhere.

the article seems pretty clear that nobody is saying (or trying to say) anything conclusive.

posted on November 18th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Yup, I have no qualms with what you posted, I just think people shouldn't jump the gun, as happened with other posts 

posted on November 18th, 2011, 7:43 pm

Dominus, they did it twice, and it produced the same results twice, this isn't jumping the gun anymore, this is real!

Scientists just don't want to put einstein at fault, either because of pride or because if the general theory of relativity fails, then they will have some serious head scratching to do!

posted on November 18th, 2011, 7:50 pm

For instance, the group should have seen both tau and muon neutrinos, but did not.

I am wondering that Dom now is an expert for higher physics (maybe you can explain to us what that quote means)...thought you are an evolution science student...

posted on November 18th, 2011, 7:56 pm

Twice  I suggest again to read about how physics experiments are done as well as this particular experiment. I am sure it will be quite intriguing to you .

My fiance is the physics aficionado - I just have an amateur interest . However, one doesn't have to be an expert to understand the literature and to be able to list flaws that leading researchers have brought up. I'm certain, Drrrrr, that you can look up the descriptions of neutrino decay more easily than I can write it here - either way it would be a matter of copy/paste as this is well studied stuff

posted on November 18th, 2011, 9:12 pm

Dominus, they did it twice, and it produced the same results twice, this isn't jumping the gun anymore, this is real!

dom did science nerd so im gonna do math nerd now.
using your logic i will prove all odd numbers greater than 1 are prime:

3, check
5, check

ok we're done we found 2 cases. all odd numbers are prime

now to be an arsehole im gonna insult dom's field (science) cos maths are awesome.

a scientist would approach this problem as:

3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is an anomalous result, 11 is prime.....

a humanities student would approach it as:

3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is prime, 11 is prime......

srs humanities is a joke

dbl srs lets not jump the gun on this. let the guys in white jackets do the experiments and stuff. if it turns out einstein cocked up decades ago a few more months of waiting wont destroy the universe.

[sectoid]

posted on November 18th, 2011, 9:15 pm

Last edited by sectoid on November 18th, 2011, 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

There is still a lot of room for error - if I've got it right an insanely small mistake in measurment would mean this whole experiment proves nothing.
Second thing is, that even if those neutrinos were faster than light, it does not mean that the whole theory of relativity is useless or "fundamentally incorrect" - it would just mean that in this particular example it does not correspond to facts - so when dealing with neutrinos we just keep it in mind.
When bus does not arive according to schedule, it does not mean that the schedule is incorect for all buses (If you can't repair it with a hammer it does not follow that it cannot be repaired at all, nor that you can't repair anything with a hammer). As long as you know when certain thing works and when it does not (i.e. you do have a criterion for its correctness) there is no real problem.

an example from Myles's post above:

In the interval all odd numbers except 9 are prime. - this is a true statement
So even if we jump the gun, all we can say is: "Well, it does not hold true for neutrinos."

posted on November 18th, 2011, 9:47 pm

what country are you from sectoid, i've never seen angle brackets and semicolon used as notation for an interval before. i'd like to know in which country it's used.

posted on November 18th, 2011, 9:53 pm

what country are you from sectoid, i've never seen angle brackets and semicolon used as notation for an interval before. i'd like to know in which country it's used.

Czech republic :-).