Warp Speed Mr Scott?

[Gareth]

Apparently E=mc2.   I'm nothing like smart enough at physics to understand what this means, and frankly I don't think anyone else has an answer either, but this is a real mind bender.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/us-science-light-idUSTRE78L4FH20110922

[Sazabi]

Hasn't it also been hypothesized that particles just after the Big Bang traveled at superluminal velocities for a couple fractions of a second, helping to explain why our universe is larger than what luminal velocities would allow?

[Medic82]

Can't we just get Mr.Whippy's daugther on the forum and have her try to explain it for us? We need inside info on this!!!

[AHB]

Can't we just get Mr.Whippy's daugther on the forum and have her try to explain it for us? We need inside info on this!!!

+1 

[captain spaulding]

Hasn't it also been hypothesized that particles just after the Big Bang traveled at superluminal velocities for a couple fractions of a second, helping to explain why our universe is larger than what luminal velocities would allow?

You are correct in saying that. While it is not proven it is looking more like truth now. I for one am very interested in these sort of things and hope they can duplicate the results. Its not science unless it can be duplicated. 

[Mike, Lord of the Spammers!]

Damn that does set the cat amoung the pigeons

We need Brian Cox to join MTO

[jerseydevil]

OK, my head exploded trying to make sense of that article. I think I'll just stick to history.

[tattoosteve99]

Well first off some of these are just theories. Second off how did they measure when the neutrons left faster than light when light travels around 168000 miles per second. Where they able to record backwards in a time theorem? Our technology is good but really can it record a test that travels faster than modern tech can record. I think not. Unfortunately I am one of those who keep up with CERN and other related subjects because I love science. But on another hand these are from a collider that we built specifically to speed up protons, neutrons, and other sub atomic particles for the these test. Hence the name "particle accelerator".

[mvyrmnd]

The problem with this experiment is that the difference between the speed of light and the speed of he neutrinos was so small that it could very well be just an equipment error.

In order for a neutrino to travel faster than light it must have no mass (according to relativity). We don't properly understand mass. That's why the LHC is chasing the Higgs Boson.

If the neutrino has some special property that reduces its mass as its speed increases then that would be an incredible breakthrough...

[tattoosteve99]

It could also be that the collider created a small black hole, or a rift or wormhole though the space time continuum. No pun intended. Then just as it slowed down back to normal velocity it reappeared somewhere else. 

[tattoosteve99]

I LOVE THIS THREAD!!!!!

[jekostas]

The mice are screwing with us again.

[Gareth]

The mice are screwing with us again.

personally I blame it on the dolphins.

[tattoosteve99]

Mice?? I don't get it.

[mvyrmnd]

It could also be that the collider created a small black hole, or a rift or wormhole though the space time continuum. No pun intended. Then just as it slowed down back to normal velocity it reappeared somewhere else.

This wasn't done in a collider. These neutrinos were shot through 500 miles of solid rock.

You may be on to something though... If you recall the Bajoran Wormhole from Star Trek DS9 emitted huge amounts of neutrinos before opening.

[kirk13]

Mice?? I don't get it.

Its a Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy referance Steve.It turns out the earth is a giant computer built for mice to find the Ultimate Answer to the question of life the universe and everything.

Oh the dolphins left before the earth got destroyed!

I'm your plastic pal whos fun to be with

[tattoosteve99]

It could also be that the collider created a small black hole, or a rift or wormhole though the space time continuum. No pun intended. Then just as it slowed down back to normal velocity it reappeared somewhere else.

This wasn't done in a collider. These neutrinos were shot through 500 miles of solid rock.

You may be on to something though... If you recall the Bajoran Wormhole from Star Trek DS9 emitted huge amounts of neutrinos before opening.

How did they measure it then? Did they have a receiver buried 500 miles in?

[mvyrmnd]

It could also be that the collider created a small black hole, or a rift or wormhole though the space time continuum. No pun intended. Then just as it slowed down back to normal velocity it reappeared somewhere else.

This wasn't done in a collider. These neutrinos were shot through 500 miles of solid rock.

You may be on to something though... If you recall the Bajoran Wormhole from Star Trek DS9 emitted huge amounts of neutrinos before opening.

How did they measure it then? Did they have a receiver buried 500 miles in?

Yes.

[jekostas]

Mice?? I don't get it.

Its a Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy referance Steve.It turns out the earth is a giant computer built for mice to find the Ultimate Answer to the question of life the universe and everything.

Oh the dolphins left before the earth got destroyed!

I'm your plastic pal whos fun to be with

Actually, they were looking to find the Question.  The Answer was 42.

[Mr. Whippy]

Here's what the family physicist has to say:

Fermilab had similar results a few years ago, but with a huge margin of error.  The experiment had a narrow margin of error.  So, if it can be duplicated, it would violate Einstein's theory of special relativity.  It would force a complete reworking of the "Standard model".  There'd be a tremendous amount of work for theoretical physicists (which is good for my business).

[Heinz Doofenshmirtz]

From what I've read on this, FermiLab is going to try and replicate CERN's results with the LHC.  As the Capt. said, it's not science until it's replicated.  Remember the teapot tempest over cold fusion?

I'm no physicist, but I am a cognitive neuroscientist so I follow important developments in other fields as well, and I don't think it's necessarily true that Relativity would have to be scrapped and something new put in place.  Relativity was able to accept a few small revisions to account for the faster than light expansion of the universe in the nanoseconds after the Big Bang.  It may very well be possible to add something to Relativity to account for this, like has been done for every discovery since.

My take on this is that it's one of two things: 1) Equipment error, miscalibration, human error, etc.  Some kind of noise in the data; 2) a oh so slight warping of the space/time fabric, and if that is indeed the case, then it means it's theoretically possible to build some type of field coil that is capable of doing that same thing.  (That's how warp engines in Star Trek work, and why they're called "warp" engines.)  But anything is possible, after all, truth is stranger than fiction...

By the by, just an FYI for the laypeople; a theory isn't proven or disproven, it's a collection of facts and definitions that organizes a body of empirical data and allows the explanation of past events and the formulation of hypotheses to test and predict future events.  Theories are not proven or disproven, despite what Karl Popper said, it is hypotheses that are proven or disproven.  What's more to say that an hypothesis is proven or disproven is an over simplification; rather, positive results are evidence to support a conclusion about an experimental outcome.  The more times the outcome is replicated, the more confident we can be of the veracity of the claim.  So any positive outcome never proves or disproves anything, it just provides more evidence supporting a particular conclusion.

[Chako]

Well said Heinz. I couldn't have said it better. 

[Mr. Whippy]

The folks at CERN want Fermilab (and/or the equivalent in Japan, I think it's the Super-K) to replicate their experiment.  Fermilab needs a more precise detector.

IF the finding is confirmed, it violates a bedrock of the Standard model. It would require massive reworking and possibly abandoning large parts of our current theories (Relativity and quantum mechanics--which have serious conflicts currently).

Spacetime already warps (gravity) and QM allows for wormhole effects, but that would imply the neutrinos ended up NOT where they were expected, rather than faster than expected.

(Just my rough translation of what was explained to me)

[Chako]

I teach my students that there are no "standard" models in science. Only current knowledge. If enough evidence supports a theory, then it becomes common place up to the point where we know that something doesn't quite fit. Then we will either make that knowledge fit, or discard the original theory for something newer.

Atomic theory is a good example of how the concept morphs with each new discovery. What I teach my students today, may not be what I teach them years down the road.

This is quite exciting, and i do hope they can replicate this finding.

[Mercury]

I'm with Tom.  History is my thing.  I love reading this stuff but I need to spend a few years studying to even be able to participate on a remotely equal level. 

[Mr. Whippy]

I teach my students that there are no "standard" models in science. Only current knowledge. If enough evidence supports a theory, then it becomes common place up to the point where we know that something doesn't quite fit. Then we will either make that knowledge fit, or discard the original theory for something newer.

Atomic theory is a good example of how the concept morphs with each new discovery. What I teach my students today, may not be what I teach them years down the road.

This is quite exciting, and i do hope they can replicate this finding.

The Standard Model is the equation from which all quantum physics is derived.  It is the equation that predicts which particles should be found at specific energies.  That's its name, not a descriptor.

Wikipedia link to the Standard Model

the Standard Model is analogous to Evolution.  That's the name of the theory/model/equation (ie thought process), not it's description

[tattoosteve99]

Well I think that not every variable can be recreated. Time, force, gravitation pull, etc. Therefore the process could never be repeated exactly as it was. It could be close but only time will tell.

[82brutus]

Maybe the person reading the neutrino's ear tag was dyslexic and it was a different neutrino.   

I love reading about these types of scientific experiments.  Science is    stuff.  

[Neil]

[Gareth]

Neutrino walks into a bar for the very first time; barman says "same again"?