Roll over Einstein: Pillar of physics challenged

page: 3
142
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
What if they have really discovered the magnetic field radius of sub atomic particles,
and it was that which set off the sensor 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light.

.?.

David Grouchy




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


So you believe there is something wrong with the equipment or the software they are using to record thier data? I suppose that would seem to be the more logical answer. Horses not zebras and all that. However, the LHC is one of the most complicated machines ever put together, and finding out what may be wrong with it may take some time. If its true that there is a failiure in the system somewhere then this is a set back that CERN really do not need at this point.

Edit: Im a moron, seems to be the case that the LHC was not actualy involved .
edit on 22-9-2011 by TrueBrit because: Im a complete moron, with all the reading comprehension ability of a stunned ox.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Well I remember reading that back in 1998. They are called TACHYONS. (well apparently neutrinos and tachyons are not the same thing) They go faster than light... but they are still limited by the speed of light... they can't go SLOWER than the speed of light.

What I read in 1998... I don't remember if the tachyons were theorized... or they were newly discovered...

But since the LHC just ``found them`` apparently it was just a theory when I read about it. But from what I remember, in the article, they had observed them... anyways.
edit on 22-9-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-9-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-9-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)


I remember this as well, but it was in 2000. I remember it because read it on a trustworthy US science-site and I sent the article to the science reporter from the provider's news site and he was amazed but he didn't want to post it because he wanted confirmation from other sources. Never heard from ever since.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Wait a minute!

I thought "the science is settled."

Isn't there a "consensus" of qualified scientists who say otherwise?

jw



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 


This is waaaay cool.
More info here: CERN claims faster-than-light particle measured


CERN says a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant. But given the enormous implications of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there was no flaws in the experiment.

"We have not found any instrumental effect that could explain the result of the measurement," said Antonio Ereditato, a physicist at the University of Bern, Switzerland, who was involved in the experiment known as OPERA.

The CERN researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 


I, have been saying this, since I was about 5 years old. i'll be back soon, when the scientists of the worlds ego's have deflatted some more.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Ok, here goes nothing. I'm in no way educated in science, so I might just be blattering here.

What if... our calculation of the maximum possible speed was always just a bit off.

The conditions in the LHC are quite different then a light-beam that can be measured. Light, once left the source, is an autonomous force naked to other forces and energies such as gravity. But the speed of the particles at CERN is maintained by the LHC and conditions might be more balanced then any setup for measuring the speed of light.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
I've always wondered about the so-called speed of light "speed barrier".

Recall that not so long ago the speed of sound was also thought to be an impenetrable barrier - until someone did it.

Now we do it all the time.

The sound barrier wasn't physics barrier - it was a barrier to manned airplanes. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

We knew things traveled faster than sound all over the place (bullets, meteors, our own Earth) but we couldn't figure out how to design the structure & shape of an airplane so that it wouldn't break apart as it tried to push through the speed of sound.

Even if these neutrinos prove to have the capability to go just a bit faster than light doesn't mean we'll have aircraft doing the same anytime soon. Neutrinos have almost zero (but nonzero) mass - airplanes have lots of mass, and will become more "massive" (not bigger, just more mass) as they approach the speed of light.

But I digress...



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrismir
Ok, here goes nothing. I'm in no way educated in science, so I might just be blattering here.

What if... our calculation of the maximum possible speed was always just a bit off.

The conditions in the LHC are quite different then a light-beam that can be measured. Light, once left the source, is an autonomous force naked to other forces and energies such as gravity. But the speed of the particles at CERN is maintained by the LHC and conditions might be more balanced then any setup for measuring the speed of light.


There is a extreamly tiny chance that the Neutrino passed by a micro-black hole.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 

Considering that great scientist/engineer's at the LHC can't figure out how to even keep birds from flying around and dropping bread on their super high-tech machine, I'm willing to accept the fact that at CERN, something is wrong with their equipment and they aren't measuring exactly what they think they're measuring.

edit on 9/22/2011 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
So does relativity exclude the possibility of faster than light objects? Or only that you cannot break the barrier (either way)?


Einstein said: You can not accelerate mass to the speed of light.

He did not say that you could start at a higher speed.

That's why people still searching for the Tachyon.
Wich is said to only be able to exist at faster than the speed of light.
And be travling backwards in time..



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
I've always wondered about the so-called speed of light "speed barrier".

Recall that not so long ago the speed of sound was also thought to be an impenetrable barrier - until someone did it.


It was not an impenetrable barrier, as everybody knew rifle bullets traveled faster than the speed of sound.

It was just technically difficult for an aircraft to do, as the known theory of subsonic flight was not applicable in the transonic and supersonic region, and the difficult transonic instabilities resulted in substantial mechanical stresses on the aicraft. It was an engineering, not a physics problem.

If people thought it was an impenetrable physical barrier they probably wouldn't have devoted so much effort to making aircraft to break it.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by warsight
 


I thought our Universe moved faster than the speed of light as it expands?

I also thought that a Blackhole swallowed light, does this not mean what ever it is its faster than light if light cannot escape?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
you could never get the mindless ideots to see that just because scientists say there is a light barrier. that it is absolutely true and can never change. well now you see scientists are child like idiots. that only know what they can see. and when the door opens. they cry. because the are wrong. next black holes and dark mater.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Fascinating!

I have always loved physics and especially particle physics and string theory. I pretend as best I can I understand the basics, but alas I am not mathematically inclined. Oh to have a 150+ IQ! I surely would have ended up in this field.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Always found in my research on the subject that an "object" that could travel faster than light is actually traveling backwards in time and would have no mass...........antimatter particles are thought to be this.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Nothing is supposed to go faster than light?

How does light not escape black holes then?

Also ,we're on a planet that is spinning around itself and around the sun ,
all of which is on a spinpath in the galaxy which for all we know could also be moving fast
so we may already be moving at light speed in a way without even realizing it.

In fact it might even be fatal to go below light speed when you really start thinking about it.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 


any of you recall hearing how you ever so slightly change size when you're in motion? perhaps the speed of light is not a speed but a size?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
This is old news - it's an accepted fact in many circles that the speed of light is based on gravity not a set speed and this is what allowed the universe to hyper expand after the big bang.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Well that lends more credence to the theory that were in an altered reality since they fired up the LHC.





new topics
top topics
 
142
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join