The speed of light may have been broken.

No... I think you have made it clear what you think of mainstream science.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, and renormalization hadn't been invented yet. When something came out to be infinity, well, we just assumed that it really was infinity.

Ya, I got to go back to graduate school for some advance courses in ring algebra. There's gotta be a "gotcha" in there somewhere....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow so much meanness! Haven't seen anything like that since Dr. Joseph Weber threatened to bar me from the Physics program at the University of Maryland if I didn't drop my Photography class.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

When in doubt there is always a YouTube video that can clear things up.

CERN Breaks Speed of Light - Alain Aspect Nominated for Nobel Prize for breaking speed of light

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Welcome to the forum and please don't hesitate to have some fun.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Wow, krdu, probably the only thing a new member to the forum could do to convince me they weren't a sock puppet for another account is to express shock at the level of 'meanness' here...Welcome to Sciforums!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A source of anti-neutrinos can induce the conversion of protons to neutrons + positrons, as was observed by Reines and Cowan themselves. Ordinary neutrinos don't do that. I think the only major controversy is whether anti-neutrinos are really just right-handed neutrinos.

 

This comes close to my point. Whether there are neutrinos and antineutrinos or just neutrinos is still a theoretical debate. Unlike other fundamental particles, neutrinos appear to have only two defining aspects, mass and spin. With no charge how does spin alone define the difference, as neutrino and antineutrino?

Unless one returns to the idea that "spin" when referring to particles is charge like, rather than being associated with angular momentum, it has no real anti anything character. If it is associated with angular momentum then it very well could have some impact on how the neutrino interacts with other particles, on those rare occassions when it does interact.

Even though, the weak nuclear force has become the electroweak nuclear force, suggesting that there is some very weak field like interaction involved, neutrino collisions still look like Fermi Model collisions. The electroweak character seems to be seen in the products of collisions, not in the neutrino itself. There does not seem to be the same scattering patterns seen in other particle collisions, when looking at collisions initiated by neutrinos.

 

I suppose it is possible than a Nuetrino is a majorana Fermion... if it has a mass this implies the coupling of the two energy solutions, the particle and antiparticle. But as far as we are concerned, all experimental physics suggests that the Nuetrino has an antiparticle and behaves as though it is a Dirac Particle.

 

New test beats speed of light again...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236

 

I know it's spine-tingling!!!!!!!! I was about to report it myself then thought to check this thread first.

This has really made, excellent physics! It also shows that some of the best minds in the world have assumed the most probable answer and has shown to be least acceptable now. Step over old relativity, a new modification will be in midst concerning the speed of light as the ultimate speed...

I should add however a particle which begins it's speed above the speed of light does not violate relativity, to violate relativity you need to accelerate a particle to and above the threshold of ''c''.

 

Reiku was right all along.

Pitty his speculations 4 years ago hadn't been taken all too seriously.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What is the time required for each of the particles in the above diagram to get from point A to point B?

Two of them are travelling in the negative timestream, are they not?

I can conceive of a chain of interactions that would give the appearance of exceeding c, without ever doing so. You just arrive sooner than you should.

For example, I could appear to travel at 3c by taking two steps forward, one step back (in time) while taking three steps foward in space.

What (if any) interactions is the neutrino having along the way that could amount to interim time reversals?

The headline is great, but here's one that never got much interest: PHOTON FOUND TRAVELING AT LIGHTSPEED! CONCLUSION: IT IS ETERNAL!

 

What are you talking about?

Two steps forward, and one step back... sounds like the Hokey Pokey to me.

 

We aren't getting spooky here are we?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Absolutely!.., or not!

Here is a link to the arxiv preprint of the new paper, Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the*OPERA detector in the CNGS beam*

And not I have not read I yet, but if the info from the press release and abstract hold up, it does toss a monkey wrench into things.

 

I have a silly question, only because I haven't researched this issue under the presumption that they would uncover a measurement error...are they comparing the neutrino's speed over a distance X through rock to a photon's speed travelling in a vacuum over that distance X?

 

What do you think "c" represents in the paper? What do you think "c" represents in all mainstream papers?

 

I haven't read the paper bro. I became confused when someone said the Opera neutrinos traveled through rock faster than light could possibly...travel through rock. :bugeye: That made me wonder if it was a violation of c or just a violation of light-speed through a medium.

 

Well, with two steps foward and two steps back, I might be getting spooky action at a distance!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

To a neutrino, rock is mostly empty space, and only the neutrinos that reach the target detector get measured.