There was a young lady called Wright whose speed was faster than light

#1
she went out one day in a relative way and came back the previous night.



BBC News - Brian Cox on Cern's baffling light-speed find

Puzzling results from Cern, home of the Large Hadron Collider, have confounded physicists - because it seems subatomic particles have beaten the speed of light.
Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to cheat light speed - physics-math - 23 September 2011 - New Scientist

A CERN experiment claims to have caught neutrinos breaking the universe's most fundamental speed limit. The ghostly subatomic particles seem to have zipped faster than light from the particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, to a detector in Italy.

Fish that physics textbook back out of the wastebasket, though: the new result contradicts previous measurements of neutrino speed that were based on a supernova explosion. What's more, there is still room for error in the departure time of the supposed speedsters. And even if the result is correct, thanks to theories that posit extra dimensions, it does not necessarily mean that the speed of light has been beaten.

"If it's true, it's fantastic. It will rock the foundation of physics," says Stephen Parke of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois. "But we still have to confirm it."

Neutrinos are nearly massless subatomic particles that are notoriously shy of interacting with other forms of matter. An experiment called OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emusion tRacking Apparatus) sent beams of neutrinos from a particle accelerator at CERN to a detector in the Gran Sasso cavern in Italy, 730 kilometres away.

The neutrinos arrived 60 nanoseconds sooner than they would have if they had been travelling at the speed of light, the team says.
I've always wanted a tachyon.

DC
 
#3
#4
I could call you a fat ******* **** but I'm going to wait until next tuesday, hopefully we'll have time travel confirmed by then so I can come back and call you one right now.
 
#5
I could call you a fat ******* **** but I'm going to wait until next tuesday, hopefully we'll have time travel confirmed by then so I can come back and call you one right now.
Call me what you like, posh boy, you're still 'sans' personality.

Sans humour too if that's the best you bring to the party!

Popular thread this...
 
#6
This will be amazing if true... I had always thought that speed was an infinite thing given the right conditions. ... some stuff probably disappears at the SOL so evidence can't exist... :)
 
#7
But if Neutrinos are infinitesimally small when travelling faster than the speed of light, and e=mc2, how big would they be if travelling at say mach 1, or even standing still?
 
#8
...just thought that I should add " the right conditions" being a strong tail wind or something... :)
 
#9
Druggies overdosing and thumbless paper mittens
Exlax in chocolates to give gran the shits and
Dark haired posh parents who´s kids turn out ginge,
These are a few of my favourite things.
 
#10
This will be amazing if true...
If the results are correct, it is a pretty fundamental change in the way we need to do physics. However:



And the SN1987A neutrino detection result suggests that any difference in speed between photons and neutrinos is much much lower than the LHC/OPERA result. And that's with a baseline of around 170,000 light years to show a difference, rather than 730km. Albeit, with a much lower apparent neutrino energy. Although that's 170,000 (non-moving reference frame) years ish for neutrino flavor (sic) oscillation or other energy dumping processes to occur.

I had always thought that speed was an infinite thing given the right conditions.
It is. All you need to do is measure it from the reference frame of the traveller using maps established in the non-moving reference frame (or something approximating to it.) As you approach the speed of light time dilation tends to infinity and length contraction tends to zero. So experienced speed tends, on both numerator and denominator, to infinity. All a "strong tail wind" would do is slightly change the initial reference frame.

... some stuff probably disappears at the SOL so evidence can't exist... :)
But you just had to get some gibberish in, didn't you.
 
#13
It's interesting to consider that the time slows down for these particles too, the only way we can detect muon particles is because their lifetime is extended due to their own time being slowed down. They only live for a microsecond, but they manage to reach the earth's surface because they're travelling at such high speeds. If the physics were wrong then they'd disintegrate before we had a chance to detect them.
 
#14
Relative to the Sun, the Earth rotates a gazillion miles in a year.
Not exactly rotation but the Earth's orbit is a bit under 600 million miles. So 68,000 miles per hour.

But the entire Solar system relative to some other point in space may well move.
Well, yes. The solar system is orbiting the centre of the Milky Way at about half a million mph. Which is itself moving towards the centre of the Virgo supercluster at some million miles per hour. Which is moving towards the Shapely supercluster at about 15 times that speed.

Note that even that fairly staggering velocity is only on the order of 2% of the speed of light.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#15
If God set up the Laws of Physics that Einstein brought to light (see what I did there? :) ) who gave us the neutrinos that break that Law?
 
#16
All you need to do is measure it from the reference frame of the traveller using maps established in the non-moving reference frame (or something approximating to it.) As you approach the speed of light time dilation tends to infinity and length contraction tends to zero. So experienced speed tends, on both numerator and denominator, to infinity. All a "strong tail wind" would do is slightly change the initial reference frame.
Is... is there any chance of an explanation of these words, for those of us who're interested but find mathematics makes their brains hurt?
 
#17
If God set up the Laws of Physics that Einstein brought to light (see what I did there? :) ) who gave us the neutrinos that break that Law?
Don't get me going...:)

What if there are no laws....only man made contraints because we are trapped in a dimension that appears this way? Huh...what about that?
 
#18
All you need to do is measure it from the reference frame of the traveller using maps established in the non-moving reference frame (or something approximating to it.) As you approach the speed of light time dilation tends to infinity and length contraction tends to zero. So experienced speed tends, on both numerator and denominator, to infinity. All a "strong tail wind" would do is slightly change the initial reference frame.
Is... is there any chance of an explanation of these words, for those of us who're interested but find mathematics makes their brains hurt?
Okay. Not a problem. Special relativity (the easy one) says that if you are moving relative to another object, you and they see space-time differently. Time slows down and distances compress. Until, at the speed of light, distance is zero and time lasts forever (note that this is different from time dilation under acceleration, marriage or Brize Norton)

Now assume that the two objects are yourself at different times. And note that speed = distance / time. You make your maps before you set out on your journey. This is what I called your "reference frame" - strictly your reference inertial frame. Which may, actually, be moving quite quickly.

Once you have got up to cruising speed, your clock is running more slowly. Also, the space outside is contracted, if you rely on your maps to give you your distances rather than taking new measurements. Obviously, these effects are only significant once you get close to light speed.

So assuming you continue accelerating, the distance you cross in one of your seconds tends to infinity, the numerator of the speed equation gets larger, thus you seem to be going faster than a stationary (or reference frame) observer would measure you. Also, one of your seconds becomes much longer than one measured in the reference frame. So the denominator of the speed equation gets smaller, thus you appear to be going faster yet.
 
#20
Okay. Not a problem. Special relativity (the easy one) says that if you are moving relative to another object, you and they see space-time differently. Time slows down and distances compress. Until, at the speed of light, distance is zero and time lasts forever (note that this is different from time dilation under acceleration, marriage or Brize Norton)

Now assume that the two objects are yourself at different times. And note that speed = distance / time. You make your maps before you set out on your journey. This is what I called your "reference frame" - strictly your reference inertial frame. Which may, actually, be moving quite quickly.

Once you have got up to cruising speed, your clock is running more slowly. Also, the space outside is contracted, if you rely on your maps to give you your distances rather than taking new measurements. Obviously, these effects are only significant once you get close to light speed.

So assuming you continue accelerating, the distance you cross in one of your seconds tends to infinity, the numerator of the speed equation gets larger, thus you seem to be going faster than a stationary (or reference frame) observer would measure you. Also, one of your seconds becomes much longer than one measured in the reference frame. So the denominator of the speed equation gets smaller, thus you appear to be going faster yet.
Right, I think I got a reasonable amount of that. So thanks very much! Physics is one of those fields (of many) which I find both fascinating and far beyond my mental ability.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top