BREAKING NEWS: Error Undoes Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Results, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times

Topic started on 22-2-2012 @ 04:41 PM by InSanE1

BREAKING NEWS: Error Undoes Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Results

news.sciencemag.org

It appears that the faster-than-light neutrino results, announced last September by the OPERA collaboration in Italy, was due to a mistake after all. A bad connection between a GPS unit and a computer may be to blame.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 04:41 PM by InSanE1

So it seems that what was thought by many to be proof that faster than light travel is possible was just a glitch. I'm glad that they double checked their work and equipment.

I'll admit I was rather hopeful that this wasn't an error, but I guess we'll have to wait a bit longer for some major breakthrough from them.

news.sciencemag.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 04:45 PM by mbkennel

Note. Science, not pseudoscience. Andrei Rossi, listen up.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 04:47 PM by LightSpeedDriver

reply to post by InSanE1

Over-funded dorks with a superioty complex. Who cares they can smash particles together revealing nothing of value? It was a rhetorical question.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 04:49 PM by ChaoticOrder

reply to post by InSanE1

A bad connection between a GPS unit and a computer may be to blame.

I don't really buy this... I've seen numerous threads like this... one second they've broken the speed of light, the next second someone else is saying it's a mistake, the next second they are posting a rebuttal, the next second someone else is offering a different reason for why it's a mistake... this has been going on for months, and they tested this over and over and released several research papers concerning the results, I highly doubt they used one single GPS unit in these tests, and if they did, well then they are morons for trusting the results of one unit without considering it may be faulty.

edit on 22-2-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 04:53 PM by Arbitrageur

reply to post by InSanE1

This is still an interesting result, as I didn't know a loose connection could cause a 60 nanosecond delay.

The fact that neutrinos didn't arrive 4 years earlier from supernova SN-1987A was a pretty good clue this was going to turn out to be a measurement error, so I can't say I'm the least bit surprised it was a measurement error. But I am a bit surprised the measurement error might be a loose connection. I guess we'll have to see if they confirm that was the source of the error.

There are also several replication experiments underway in various locations; we should be hearing results from them before long also.

edit on 22-2-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 05:16 PM by samaria

reply to post by InSanE1

“The bottom line is that we will not know until more measurements are done later this year,” Gillies told The Associated Press.

www.washingtonpost.com... R_story.html

thanks for the post i would've missed it if not for you

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 05:27 PM by Unity_99

I don't believe anything they say here. Other results have also demonstrated faster than light speed, in fact all their Einstein ideas, and he did just work in a patents office after all, have already been unseat including the homogenous element of space, whereas its not all the same and constant. The whales of science need to be put to pasture.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 05:35 PM by victor7

Guess time travel will have to seek another technology, but keep the faith in the collider it is a good project.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 05:41 PM by soficrow

This is not a science issue - it's a political one. And it's not about 'time travel,' it's about biology - the speed and method of our nervous systems' communications, protein folding and misfolding, and the mysteries of accelerated evolution.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 07:20 PM by AGWskeptic

Doesn't the big bang theory require that mass move at speeds above the speed of light to create the universe?

Honest question.

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 08:34 PM by victor7

reply to post by AGWskeptic

Question upon Question: Bing Bang had items moving at the speed of light to create a universe. However, the space that these items were moving into is called? i.e. if Universe is constantly expanding, then what it is expanding into?

reply posted on 22-2-2012 @ 09:00 PM by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by InSanE1

This is still an interesting result, as I didn't know a loose connection could cause a 60 nanosecond delay.

I don't know either but it's not hard to imagine how it works. If the cable is very poorly aligned, there can be all sort of spurious reflections where the coupling was supposed to be, i.e. the light pulse can be smeared out, travel back through the cable and be reflected again etc. I know I'm speculating

I'm quite disappointed by this, I was looking for a thicker plot...

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 03:59 AM by Anon77

That's unfortunate. I'd rather hoped the faster than light data was true. Could have opened some new discoveries in physics and possibly a re-think of Einstein's special theory of relativity.

Having said that though, i'm glad they re-checked the data and equipment. S+F for you...

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 04:00 AM by Anon77

Double post

edit on 23/2/12 by Anon77 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 04:13 AM by SprocketUK

It's not so simple, I just had a look at the official OPERA page and they've identified 2 possible problems, 1 which exaggerates the speed and one which underestimates it. They are only theorizing at the moment though and there is no actual evidence to say one way or the other that the experiment was affected.

ow.ly...

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 04:48 AM by ErtaiNaGia

Nope.... they are just trying to protect relativity.

So, in that idiom, they are making up excuse after excuse until they find one that the public accepts.

The truth of the matter is that Relativity is Bunk.

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 07:15 AM by Anon77

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
Nope.... they are just trying to protect relativity.

So, in that idiom, they are making up excuse after excuse until they find one that the public accepts.

The truth of the matter is that Relativity is Bunk.

The relativity theory fits best with the evidence available. If not relativity what would you personally replace it with?
Scalar field theories? Bimetric theories? Quasilinear theories? Tensor theories? Scalar-tensor theories? Vector-tensor theories? Or a Non-metric theory? The other theories can't be ruled out but equally they don't satisfy the evidence as much as the relativity theory.

You saying relativity is 'Bunk' is just a theory...

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 08:32 AM by buddhasystem

Fresh communication from the Director General of CERN:

The OPERA collaboration has informed its funding agencies and host laboratories that it has identified two possible effects that could have an influence on its neutrino timing measurement. These both require further tests with a short pulsed beam. If confirmed, one would increase the size of the measured effect, the other would diminish it. The first possible effect concerns an oscillator used to provide the time stamps for GPS synchronizations. It could have led to an overestimate of the neutrino's time of flight. The second concerns the optical fibre connector that brings the external GPS signal to the OPERA master clock, which may not have been functioning correctly when the measurements were taken. If this is the case, it could have led to an underestimate of the time of flight of the neutrinos. The potential extent of these two effects is being studied by the OPERA collaboration. New measurements with short pulsed beams are scheduled for May.

reply posted on 23-2-2012 @ 08:41 AM by Anon77

reply to post by buddhasystem

Excellent, That should sort it out. Am looking forward to seeing the results.

Personally I'm really hoping this proves the faster than light theory.

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^