Neutrinos: measurements indicate FTL travel

[LadyShea]

BBC News - Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC

Dr Ereditato and his colleagues prepare a beam of just one type, muon neutrinos, sending them from Cern to an underground laboratory at Gran Sasso in Italy to see how many show up as a different type, tau neutrinos.

In the course of doing the experiments, the researchers noticed that the particles showed up 60 billionths of a second sooner than light would over the same distance.

The team measured the travel times of neutrino bunches some 15,000 times, and have reached a level of statistical significance that in scientific circles would count as a formal discovery.

*credit to Ceptimus for bringing article to my attention

[JoeP]

Lessans was right!

[Doctor X]

EINSTEIN WAS T3H WRONG!!11!! [!--Ed.]

This subject sort of came up in Private Messaging. Since I do not play a physicist on television, I wandered about the Internetz and found a good site--I think! Anyways, continued reading on a FAQ regarding "FTL" or "faster than light travel." This may or may not be relevant:

When Einstein wrote down his postulates for special relativity, he did not include the statement that you cannot travel faster than light. There is a misconception that it is possible to derive it as a consequence of the postulates he did give. Incidentally, it was Henri Poincare who said "Perhaps we must construct a new mechanics [...] in which the speed of light would become an impassable limit." That was in an address to the International Congress of Arts and Science in 1904—before Einstein announced special relativity in 1905.

It is a consequence of relativity that the energy of a particle of rest mass m moving with speed v is given by

E = mc2/sqrt(1 - v2/c2)

As the speed approaches the speed of light, the particle's energy approaches infinity. Hence it should be impossible to accelerate an object with rest mass to the speed of light; also, particles with zero rest mass must always move at exactly the speed of light, since otherwise they would have no energy.

Is Faster-Than-Light Travel or Communication Possible?

'kay! But do not neutrinos have mass? According to Wiki--because I am lazy:

The Standard Model of particle physics assumed that neutrinos are massless, although adding massive neutrinos to the basic framework is not difficult. Indeed, the experimentally established phenomenon of neutrino oscillation requires neutrinos to have nonzero masses.[17] This was originally conceived by Bruno Pontecorvo in the 1950s.

["Snip!"--Ed.]

In 1998, research results at the Super-Kamiokande neutrino detector determined that neutrinos can oscillate from one flavor to another, which requires that they must have a nonzero mass.[32] While this shows that neutrinos have mass, the absolute neutrino mass scale is still not known. This is because neutrino oscillations are sensitive only to the difference in the squares of the masses.[33] The best estimate of the difference in the squares of the masses of mass eigenstates 1 and 2 was

["Snip!]

Even though supernova observations indicate that neutrinos propagate at the speed of light, it is not clear whether this result holds at higher energies. In particular, in the context of the Standard-Model Extension,[28][29][30] a realistic effective theory that includes Lorentz invariance violations, neutrinos experience Lorentz-violating oscillations and can travel faster than light at high energies.

Wikipoo

'kay. So almost massless which is not enough, I gather. Back to the original reference:

The situation is different for light. As the light speed barrier is approached (in a perfect vacuum) there are no such waves according to relativity (destructive or otherwise). Moving at 0.999c is just like standing still with everything rushing past you at −0.999c. Particles are routinely pushed to these speeds and beyond in accelerators, so the theory is well established. Trying to attain the speed of light in this way is a matter of chasing something that is forever just out of your reach.

'kay. This experiment seems to contradict that.

This explains why it is not possible to exceed the speed of light by ordinary mechanical means. However, it does not in itself rule out FTL travel. It is really just one way in which things cannot be made to go faster than light, rather than a proof that there is no way to do so. Particles are known to decay instantly into other particles which fly off at high speed. It is not necessary to think in terms of the particles' having been accelerated, so how could we say that they could not go faster than light?

So, very interesting. Much of the linked "FAQ" deals with the transformation of information faster than light. One thing that made my a year or so ago was the idea that the "far reaches" of the Universe is expanding faster than light--and that is not a violation. The infamous "entanglement" boils down to information is not transferred faster than light. However, if valid, does this experiment demonstrate the potential to transfer information faster than light?

--J.D.

[Dragar]

Yes, if neutrinos have mass (and it appears they have a tiny one, though we don't really know what it is), we would expect them to travel slower than light- not faster!

Still, this is only one result and while it is statistically significant, nobody really should believe it right now. There are lots of hidden error bars you can't account for in the statistics ('systematic errors') and so we will have to wait for CERN.

If CERN finds the same thing though, it will get very interesting.

[LadyShea]

Still, this is only one result and while it is statistically significant, nobody really should believe it right now. There are lots of hidden error bars you can't account for in the statistics ('systematic errors')

They are publishing it for that exact reason

But the group understands that what are known as "systematic errors" could easily make an erroneous result look like a breaking of the ultimate speed limit, and that has motivated them to publish their measurements.

"My dream would be that another, independent experiment finds the same thing - then I would be relieved," Dr Ereditato said.

But for now, he explained, "we are not claiming things, we want just to be helped by the community in understanding our crazy result - because it is crazy".

[Doctor X]

The neutrino laughs . . . laughs at your puny human physics laws and limitations, Dragar!!11


.

--J.D.

[Dragar]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

They are publishing it for that exact reason

They are handling it as best they can. To be honest, I feel terribly sorry for this research group (unless they turn out to be right of course! In which case, Nobel prize incoming...). They basically are sure they are wrong (as they say, it is crazy) but cannot find how it could be. They can't just sit on the data (funding issues, let alone scientific integrity) and so have to shuffle forward is this rather embarrassed fashion and ask for help.

So for the sake of a just universe, I really, really hope they're right all along.

[davidm]

The paper on this finding will appear later tonight, if it's not there already, here.

[BrotherMan]

IT'S ALREADY STARTED! THE UNIVERSE IS BREAKING DOWN AT THE SEEMS (sic)! THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU LET THE GAYS IN THE MILITARIES!

[davidm]

This appears to be the paper in question.

[davidm]

The Bad Astronomer weighs in: Faster Than Light Travel? Slow Down, Folks.

[ceptimus]

Did they allow for the fact that the Earth's rotation means that the detector experiences centripetal acceleration towards the Earth's axis during the neutrino's travel time?

[Angakuk]

How would that matter? I mean, that might (or might not) serve to explain what mechanism caused the neutrinos to move faster, but it still wouldn't explain how they could exceed the speed of light. It seems to me that there are only two options here. Either neutrinos can exceed the speed of light, or there is an error in the experiment and they did not actually exceed the speed of light.

[Dingfod]

Frankly, I think it was because it was downhill all the way from Switzerland to Italy.

Neutrinos: "We don't need no cosmic speed limits. We time-traveled to Key West for a margarita or two before finishing the journey. Sorry about coming back a little too soon, we were just a little tipsy. We'll be more careful about that in the FUTURE]]]]]"

[Miisa]

Yeah, just you try booking them for breaking laws of physics...

[Vivisectus]

I shall charge Nr1 Son to investigate and put it into Dr. Seuss-like language for me. It is awesome having access to an astro-physicist who will work for home-cooked food.

[Dingfod]

Well, Neutrino, if that is your real name, you're in a heap o'trouble now, boy. 186,252.000186252 miles per second in a 186,252 zone. That's gonna cost ya, boy.

[mickthinks]

[LadyShea]

Awesome find mick, lol!

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

I shall charge Nr1 Son to investigate and put it into Dr. Seuss-like language for me. It is awesome having access to an astro-physicist who will work for home-cooked food.

Your son is an astrophysicist? That would be very handy.

My niece is a grad student in developmental psychology. I came across reference to a new paper on fMRI wrt to morals and empathy, but I didn't want to buy it for 40.00. She sent me the .pdf within 2 minutes of my asking "Hey do you have access to this journal?"

Handy, I tell ya, handy.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Your son is an astrophysicist? That would be very handy.

My niece is a grad student in developmental psychology. I came across reference to a new paper on fMRI wrt to morals and empathy, but I didn't want to buy it for 40.00. She sent me the .pdf within 2 minutes of my asking "Hey do you have access to this journal?"

Handy, I tell ya, handy.

Isn't it just?

I have been told that I can get a detailed explanation in exchange for a small bucket of my "dreadnought" Chili con Carne, so I should have the lowdown this sunday when he comes home for the weekly feeding up and clothes washing.

[thedoc]

I wonder if they actually measured the time it takes light to travel between the 2 points, or did they just calculate it and make a mistake?

[Vivisectus]

You cannot measure the speed of light between 2 points. You can only calculate how long it takes for light to travel to a point and bounce back

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

You cannot measure the speed of light between 2 points. You can only calculate how long it takes for light to travel to a point and bounce back

Exactly, they don't actually 'know' how long it would take for light to get there especially since there is a bit of light blocking ground between them. So what did they miss in their calculations?

[Miisa]

Maybe light takes longer normally when measured as it is narcissistic and stops for a while at the mirror?