Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
FTL
#1
Well, it looks like the General Theory of Relativity has been challenged.

If the Cern discoveries are verified, then Einstein made an incorrect judgement that the speed of light is a universal constant. I early on worked through the math and never understood what made "C" unattainable. Mass and energy equations are one thing - but a constant is another. The Doppler effect, Lorentz contractions, and all the other parts that went into the theory all make sense - but when did partial observances define everything?

If neutrinos don't have mass, then why should a mass-energy equation bind them?
Reply
#2
When I read this earlier, I note the "seemed to show" phrase. And lo and behold, it was still there just a minute ago. I'll reserve judgment until it is changed to "found to show".
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#3
Neutrinos are believed to have mass.

And I'm with John on skepticism;this needs to be checked and rechecked several times before believing, it is way too illogical to have a second speed limit just a bit above the first one.
Sanders 2020

Reply
#4
Relativity has been thoroughly tested in every way and found to agree with nature.
This latest finding will probably be found to be a statistical error, or some quirk about neutrinos.
There are no police enforcing the C limit because there are no violators.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#5
They are doing the right thing by handing over their methods and conclusions for their peers to review. I would be skeptical if they held out information for whatever reasons.

If this proves to be accurate, does this do anything other than update science school books?
[Image: 760.png]
Reply
#6
If this is proven correct (it wont be) then the entire Standard Model is wrong.
Textbooks get updated and physicists get full employment.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#7
But if it's correct, does this bring us closer to a Grand Unified Theory?
[Image: 760.png]
Reply
#8
This will not be proven correct, no chance.

(On a physics maillist I'm on the discussion is about possible measurement errors -- there are MANY places for these -- and no excitement in the air.)
Sanders 2020

Reply
#9
(09-23-2011, 07:09 PM)ghoullio Wrote: But if it's correct, does this bring us closer to a Grand Unified Theory?

It is not correct.
Even if it was the search for a GUT would have to start from scratch from whatever new model they came up with.
A Grand Unified Theory would make no difference in our lives anyway, unless you can harness the energy of a supernova.

Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#10
Something with mass simply cannot outrun a photon, IMO.
Reply
#11
How can there be a Universal constant, when gravity is instantaneous? (Gravitons are theoretical massless spin-2 particles that are imagined by String theory to explain the metrics of gravity.) I know the math works, I am also concerned with philosophy. Wrap your mind around the fact that gravitational effects are instantaneous, yet any particles or waves that connect the locations are not. Once again, the SF concept of a multidimensional universe arises.

Braneless interactivity plugs the holes in the Einsteinian gap - but is only a guess to explain how things work. We use imaginary numbers all the time in math, and they make equations work - but like Schrödinger's cat, many things are still speculative.

What the Cern scientists discovered was replicated in their experiments and therefore passed the scientific test, but because the discovery was so important, they asked for others to look at it for wide-spread verification. ...Very conservative of them for such a momentous discovery.
Reply
#12
Gravity is not instantaneous. Where do you get that idea?
Ever hear of gravity waves?
They have been detected. Gravity travels at the same speed as light.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#13
Quote:The phase velocity of a wave is the rate at which the phase of the wave propagates in space.
...
The phase velocity of electromagnetic radiation may, under certain circumstances, (for example anomalous dispersion) exceed the speed of light in a vacuum ...

LINK

Given that particles are represented by waves or wave packets in quantum mechanics (the dual nature of matter), why could they not appear to exceed the speed of light?

The discrepancy is in the 6th significant digit. Are we assured that the error bars in the experiment are better than that?
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#14
The difference in travel time is sixty billionths of a second, which is 2.00138457 × 10-16 meters (0.0000000000000002 meters).

Any error in the distance measurement or the neutrino measurement can easily account for that. A truck driving by the lab could shake the building by that much. A slight moving of a tectonic plate could account for that.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#15
Too much unproved theory. Using standard experimental techniques, measurements of propagation speeds are too great to measure - but all are substantially greater than light speed. Many mathematicians believe that recognizing FTL propagation of gravity may be the key to taking conventional physics to the next plateau.

But that's not what I was writing about. Photons and Massless particles are allowed to violate the universal constant routinely. I still have trouble sifting through the exceptions that are allowed to make things work. Too much "exceptions that prove the rule" in my experience, I guess. Maybe gravity isn't instantaneous - but I'm not sure what the limits are.

There is a dilemma in physics. You must ignore real metrics to accept the light speed limitation to the speed of gravity. Sir Arthur Eddington said something about that in 1920, I think, that is considered a real-world proof. Either Gravity is FTL or the orbital mechanics of our stellar system must cause a change of period.

String Theory is relatively new, and may be more finely crafted to make better sense of things. Until that happens, the Cern discovery may open many new avenues in research.
Reply
#16
(09-25-2011, 11:30 PM)WmLambert Wrote: measurements of propagation speeds are too great to measure - but all are substantially greater than light speed. Many mathematicians believe that recognizing FTL propagation of gravity may be the key to taking conventional physics to the next plateau.
No, scientists know how fast it is. Gravity propagates at light speed.
Did you read the wikipedia article I linked to?
Quote:Photons and Massless particles are allowed to violate the universal constant routinely.
No, they are not, and they dont.

Are you posting from a poor scifi novel, or just pulling this stuff out of your butt?
S6
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#17
(09-25-2011, 11:30 PM)WmLambert Wrote: Photons and Massless particles are allowed to violate the universal constant routinely.

I don't think I follow...the speed of light law was specifically written to restrain photons, if they violate it routinely, who then would obey the law? S6 And what is the point of having laws that no one obeys?
Sanders 2020

Reply
#18
Physical laws are merely an attempt by human theoretical physicists and mathematicians to describe the reality of the cosmos as we have been able to observe it and measure it so far with the instruments that we have currently. There are actually no "laws," as such. Newton's "laws" of motion were not really laws, they were merely descriptions of phenomena that proved reliable only up to a certain point--where Einsteinian physics takes over. And who is to say there is not a point at which something else will take over from Einsteinian physics? It does not require that we rebel against the "laws" of the universe. It only requires that we make better observations. We must always "ask the next question."

The Bible implies that there is a whole range of reality beyond the three (or four) dimensions we are familiar with, a realm called spirit for want of a more precise term where beings that are "spiritual" in nature exist. Perhaps this is a range of "upper" dimensions (or we might call it "upper space"). Whatever. It is interesting that in Daniel chapter nine, we are presented with a prayer Daniel prayed, and then at the end of it the angel Gabriel appears, and says that from the beginning of his prayer he was dispatched to talk to Daniel to enlighten him. (See Daniel 9:20-23.) Now, of course we don't know where Heaven is located, but if we take a speculative view shared by some people that it is off in the direction of the Great Nebula in Orion (the SDA prophet, Ellen G. White, said that when Jesus comes, He will come "through the open space in Orion"--Early Writings, p. 50), then that means that in the time it took Daniel to pray his prayer (it takes less than ten minutes to read it), the angel Gabriel at least covered some 1,344 light years (plus or minus 20) just to travel from the Great Nebula to earth. Check my math, but assuming it took ten minutes for Daniel to pray his prayer, that would mean Gabriel travelled some 70,640,640 times the speed of light. I don't even know what "warp factor" that would represent.
Reply
#19
Ron -

we may not have the physical laws correct yet, but surely they exist.

I do agree that we should keep advancing our knowledge.
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#20
http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php
Sanders 2020

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)