It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Loose cable could explain faster-than-light neutrinos

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Loose cable could explain


www.csmonitor.com

Experiments conducted in Europe in September and November appeared to show neutrinos violating Einstein's theory of special relativity. But now scientists suspect it could be a faulty measurement caused by bad connection.
(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on 24-2-2012 by Jaellma because: part of subject line was missing

edit on 24-2-2012 by Jaellma because: part of subject line was missing




posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
There had been discussions on this board previously that neutrinos violated Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Now it appears the previous tests conducted were faulty.

So, Einstein theory is safe for now! Neutrinos faster than light has been debunked, or so they say.

Not sure if this story has been posted here already but if so, please disregard. If not, this requires some comments, at least.

www.csmonitor.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaellma


There had been discussions on this board previously that neutrinos violated Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Now it appears the previous tests conducted were faulty.

So, Einstein theory is safe for now! Neutrinos faster than light has been debunked, or so they say.

Not sure if this story has been posted here already but if so, please disregard. If not, this requires some comments, at least.

www.csmonitor.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


How did you come to the conclusion that the original test was faulty and Einstein's theory is safe for now when the article you quoted holds no conclusions?

I see the words "could" and 'might" which certainly doesn't imply certainty. Maybe it's a faulty cable, maybe it's something else. Or maybe *gasp* Einstein is wrong. Not trying to be sarcastic or anything so no offense but the worshipping of Einstein IMO by some in the scientific community is slowing progress. Fresh minds, fresh ideas and fresh possibilities, we need a new generation Einstein.
edit on 24-2-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaellma
or so they say.


Christian Science Monitor uh huh....

I like this statement..


And indeed, in November, another group of physicists also working at Gran Sasso Laboratory demonstrated that the neutrinos in question could not possibly have been traveling faster than light, because if they had, they would have given off a telltale type of radiation, which was not detected.


If they have never had them go faster than light before, how would they know this 'telltale radiation'?

Silly scientists :shk:



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
This explanation stinks to my nose. Reminds me of crashed Mars probes with mismatch metric and feet computer instructions that simply should not/could not happen (unless desired).

If you tend to think these statements are way off-base, I suggest that you read The Hubble Warsby Eric J. Chaisson, 1994. Written by a scientist that worked on the project, he provides a sly but strong suggestion that the Hubble was intentional flawed from the onset by various US satellite intel agencies to avoid other nations knowing exactly how terrific was the resolving power of the mirror. That was because much the same mirrors were used in secret spy satellites years earlier. Would they sabotage a two-billion dollar scientific instrument that was a wonderful gift to the world? You would wish not, but read the detailed story he gives and you may wonder otherwise. (I'm willing to bet that most people even on ATS know nothing of that situation,)

You would think they would have had redundancies up the wazoo to prove this experiment. Not to mentioned before, during and after systems that would seek out exactly the most basic problem they could have had. But a loose connection...?

Then there was the denied positive findings of the Search for Life experiments on the Viking Landers back in the 1970s.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


These tests are mainly based on exploring String theory, So the "Tell tale Radiation" is what is predicted in the Theories that deal with FTL movement. a Particle would have to achieve a state of semi-radiation existence to travel as Light (Electro-magnetic Radiation) does. Mind you this is the best way I have been given to understand it, I am going to school with the goal of Gaining my Phd in Physics, with a focus on Theoretical Physics, and I have not yet taken Classes specific to it and a lot of what I know is self taught.

Mind you I am EXTREMELY excited at the prospect of FTL movement being possible, and the massive implications it would have in my chosen field of study.
edit on 24-2-2012 by PriestOfAries because: Posted to quickly



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


So basically you have a theoretic prediction of tell tale events based on a theory of theory... Did I get that right?



Now since light itself is both wave AND particle, we already have all sorts of matter zipping around the Universe at light speeds

edit on 24-2-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


So basically you have a theoretic prediction of tell tale events based on a theory of theory... Did I get that right?



Now since light itself is both wave AND particle, we already have all sorts of matter zipping around the Universe at light speeds

edit on 24-2-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



www.abovetopsecret.com...

Among others.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


I don't have anything, Scientist will Billions of dollars in research funds and equipment have Theories. Just as Relativity is Just a theory, until proven or disproved. Since we are now at a point where basic observation is not anywhere near enough to explain what we are seeing, you have to use Scientific method to come to a conclusion. It's physics, it's not something so easily explained. I went to a conference because it sounded interesting, and at the start the speaker said "If you are not a physicist, or currently studying physics, you will be lost a lot of the time but we will do our best to try and included everyone" Kind of Condescending yep, but he was completely right. I Sat there in Glossy eyed confusion for a good 45 minutes of the hour long lecture. That is exactly why I'm back in school, because I couldn't fully engage it what I was hearing. Unless your a Physicist, or very well versed in it a lot of what dictates the results will sound like crap.

And you must have missed the "Faster" then Light part of the article. Nothing except for this result, has show in any conclusive way that FASTER then light travel is possible.
edit on 24-2-2012 by PriestOfAries because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by QueSeraSera

Originally posted by zorgon
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


Now since light itself is both wave AND particle, we already have all sorts of matter zipping around the Universe at light speeds

edit on 24-2-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



www.abovetopsecret.com...

Among others.


Even though light (photons) is technically Fermion ( or rather act as such ) it doesn't apply to "Matter" in such a plain way. I'm really not trying to sound degrading but your lack of education on the subject is what is making it so hard for you to understand this. Just as my lack of education is making it hard for me to explain it to you.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


I'm certainly no scholar, but what I was trying to point out is that there are a number of threads on this topic already. Maybe they should be consolidated for continuity, that's all. :~)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by QueSeraSera
 


Oh sorry that was meant to be a reply to Zorgon, It's been a long day, lol. I try and get into the discussions as much as possible but limited access to wifi ( I drive OTR ) and the mass amount of "I'm the King of the Aliens" and " The Earth is Flat" it's hard. I will dive into the Thread you linked though. Thanks



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by PriestOfAries
reply to post by QueSeraSera
 


Oh sorry that was meant to be a reply to Zorgon, It's been a long day, lol. I try and get into the discussions as much as possible but limited access to wifi ( I drive OTR ) and the mass amount of "I'm the King of the Aliens" and " The Earth is Flat" it's hard. I will dive into the Thread you linked though. Thanks


S'OK.
Peace. ( second ) :~)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by QueSeraSera


Thanks good link. There is one guy there who has some good anti Einstein data



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PriestOfAries
I don't have anything, Scientist will Billions of dollars in research funds and equipment have Theories. Just as Relativity is Just a theory, until proven or disproved. Since we are now at a point where basic observation is not anywhere near enough to explain what we are seeing, you have to use Scientific method to come to a conclusion.


No I don't I can use other methods to come to a conclusion.
Can't prove it but that is another matter.... and Einstein did say "Reality is merely and illusion, albeit a persistent one" and "Imagination is more important than knowledge"

In the old days we had Magic and Miracles... to day Quantum Science is beginning to see that mind does influence matter... something the secret societies have said for a very long time. But hey that is a whole different thread


But dang with all those billions and billions of buck... I want results!!! NOW!!!
Ain't gettin any younger



It's physics, it's not something so easily explained. I went to a conference because it sounded interesting, and at the start the speaker said "If you are not a physicist, or currently studying physics, you will be lost a lot of the time but we will do our best to try and included everyone" Kind of Condescending yep, but he was completely right.


I know many physicists who have the ability to explain things in a simple clear way... I have no use for condescending know it all uber scientists. In most cases, THOSE are the ones that end up being wrong in the end, and the last to admit it. Unfortunately for new kids on the block, there condescending types are usually sitting on peer boards making decision on new work that rocks their boat.

Sad but true. A new guy fresh out of college has a gauntlet of these types to get through to present any new idea

There were others who knew the secret..

Clarke's First Law:
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."
Sir Arthur C Clarke (16 December 1917–19 March 2008)

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer (22 February 1788 – 21 September 1860)


I Sat there in Glossy eyed confusion for a good 45 minutes of the hour long lecture. That is exactly why I'm back in school, because I couldn't fully engage it what I was hearing. Unless your a Physicist, or very well versed in it a lot of what dictates the results will sound like crap.


Read Steven Hawking's papers... really easy to grasp
though perhaps a bit long



And you must have missed the "Faster" then Light part of the article. Nothing except for this result, has show in any conclusive way that FASTER then light travel is possible.


I assure you I have not missed the "Faster" then Light part.
Just no need to get all excited just yet


I like Einstein, even if he is proven wrong. He reminds me of my old professor... same hair style, same crazy look... I bet he was fun to hang around with.


edit on 24-2-2012 by zorgon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


Quantum entanglement is faster than the speed of light isn't it?

Has there been a quantum entanglement experiment?



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Semicollegiate
 


Quantum Entanglement is not faster then light, it doesn't involve movement of anything from point to point, it's a connection between 2 objects not a transfer from one to the other.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by PriestOfAries
 


I had heard quantum entanglement operates over a large distance and that Albert Einstien called it spooky.
Either all changes are completely identical and opposite for the members of the pairs, or they are connected without a 4D physical explaination.
Probably identical and opposite, but depending on the distance, the particles would be subject to different forces and there would have to be a connection between them to manifest the QE effect. That would mean an extradimentional connection or a transfer of information faster than the speed of light


Thus, there is a correlation between the results of measurements performed on entangled pairs, and this correlation is observed even though the entangled pair may have been separated by arbitrarily large distances.[8]

Wiki Quantum Entanglement



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join