Ernie :
It won't happen overnight but one implication   --if this doesn't  turn out 
to be an error
of some kind--  is that the door is now open for the "next  Einstein."  
General Relativity
did not render Newton obsolete, it simply relegated him to a circumscribed  
realm of physics.
A large realm but nonetheless circumscribed. Same kind of thing may happen  
for Einstein.
 
Also :  If anything can move faster than  light the search is now on for 
other-than-neutrinos
that can really skedaddle. The Future Belongs to Pony Express  Physics.
 
Billy  
 
------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
message dated 9/23/2011 3:41:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[email protected] writes:

Hi  Billy,

On Sep 23, 2011, at 12:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>  Hopefully the visuals will transmit  --they are crucial to the  story.
> If not, and you have an interest, please go to the  site.
>  
> Question for Ernie :  If this pans  out,  what are the implications for
> the General Theory of  Relativity ?
>  
> Just thought I'd ask.

As implied by  my previous point, I honestly don't know.  The odds are 
still in favor of  some sort of calibration error.  

If it does pan out, the most  likely explanation is "the speed of 
neutrinos" is the true absolute speed  limit for the universe, and that the 
light we 
use for GPS and such is slower  than that under some circumstances.

But to be fair, if this measurement  holds up and can be robustly 
quantified, it will definitely shake up  physics.  Not "overturn relativity" 
and move 
us back to Newtonian  physics, as some hotheads are claiming, but it would 
certainly imply something  fishy about our current understanding.  Who knows 
where it could  lead?

-- Ernie P.

> Billy
>  
>   
>  
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>   
>  
>  
>  
> from the site :   Starts With a Bang
> « And the Temperature of Dark Matter is...? |  Main
> 
> This Extraordinary Claim Requires Extraordinary  Evidence!
> 
> Category: Physics • relativity
> Posted on:  September 22, 2011 5:42 PM, by Ethan Siegel
> 
> 
> "Nothing  travels faster than light, with the possible exception of bad 
news, which  follows its own rules." -Douglas Adams
> My inbox is on fire today with  messages about this story about neutrinos 
breaking the speed of light:
>  
> 
> What's going on here? A group (a large group, mind you) of  physicists 
known as the OPERA collaboration have made a neutrino beam, and  have been 
studying it for the past few years.
> 
> Making a  neutrino beam is the easiest type of beam to make, by the way. 
All you do is  shoot a bunch of high-energy particles into the Earth, like 
so.
>  
> 
> (Image credit: CERN Neutrinos to Gran Sasso.)
>  
> You shoot a high-energy beam of protons into a fixed target, and you  
make all sorts of unstable particles -- things like pions, kaons and other  
mesons -- which have a lifetime of at most a paltry few nanoseconds.
>  
> You focus this beam very tightly, so that the decay products you get  out 
travel in a narrowly collimated beam as well. What are these decay  
products?
> 
> 
> Among other things, you get a bunch of  high-energy muon neutrinos. And 
if you fire it through the Earth, everything  that isn't a neutrino gets 
wiped out in short order by the intervening atomic  material.
> 
> But the muon neutrinos, for the most part, pass  straight through the 
Earth uninhibited. Why? Because neutrinos hardly interact  with anything at 
all! We've built neutrino beams like this before: from  Fermilab (in Batavia, 
Illinois) to Minnesota, from KEK (in Japan) to  Super-Kamiokande, and others.
> 
> 
> And what we'd expect,  based on measurements of neutrino mass, is that 
these particles should be  traveling at almost, but just a hair under the 
speed of light!
>  
> And then you go and detect your neutrino.
> 
> But I just  said they don't interact with anything! So how do you do this?
>  
> 
> (Image credit: Super-Kamiokande.)
> 
> You build  a giant tank of something liquid for neutrinos to interact 
with. And although  nearly all of your neutrinos pass right through it, every 
once in a while, one  neutrino undergoes an interaction (through the weak 
force) with one of the  atoms in your detector!
> 
> And when it does, because of how  hugely energetic these neutrinos are, 
you produce either a muon (for a  mu-neutrino) or an electron (for an 
electron-neutrino) that's moving close to  the speed of light in vacuum, and 
faster 
than the speed of light in your  liquid!
> 
> 
> (Image credit: Georgia State  University.)
> 
> When you move faster than the speed of light in  a medium, you give off a 
special type of light known as Čerenkov radiation. If  you line the outer 
rim of your neutrino detector tank with photomultiplier  tubes, you can not 
only detect this radiation, you can use the information  from it to 
reconstruct exactly where and when, in your tank, this neutrino  interacted 
with one 
of your atoms!
> 
> 
> (Image credit:  Tomasz Barszczak.)
> 
> Now, in the past, we've found that these  neutrinos move, more or less, 
at the speed of light in vacuum (c), as  expected. One experiment based out 
of Chicago, a few years ago, found marginal  evidence that neutrinos might 
move just a tiny bit faster than the speed of  light, at 1.000051 (+/- 
0.000029) c.
> 
> Of course, this result  is consistent with neutrinos moving at or slower 
than the speed of light; the  errors are not significantly smaller than the 
measured difference from c. So  OPERA, whose detector is shown below, 
performed this measurement with great  care, and announced their results today.
> 
> 
> The 730  kilometer trip should have taken these neutrinos 2.43 
milliseconds, were they  traveling at the speed of light. But according to the 
OPERA 
collaboration, the  neutrinos arrived 60 nanoseconds earlier than expected, 
with a claimed  uncertainty of only ten nanoseconds!
> 
> Translating that into a  measurement for the speed of neutrinos, that 
means they are traveling at  1.0000247 (+/- 0.0000041) c.
> 
> Now, measurement at this level  of precision is not easy, and I am 
certainly not going to be the first person  to come out and say I don't 
believe, 
based on this, that  neutrinos move  faster than the speed of light. (But, as 
one of many, I don't.)
>  
> 
> Because there's a much better constraint out there on the  speed of 
high-energy neutrinos from some time ago. Above is a Hubble Space  Telescope 
time-sequenced image of the closest supernova in my lifetime:  Supernova 1987A, 
which took place in the Large Magellanic Cloud 168,000  light-years away.
> 
> This supernova was discovered, optically,  on February 24, 1987. About 
three hours earlier, 23 neutrinos were detected  over a timespan of less than 
13 seconds. The reason for the 3 hour delay? When  the core of a star 
collapses (in a type II supernova; see here), most of the  energy is radiated 
away 
in the form of neutrinos, which pass freely through  the outer material of 
the star, while the emission of visible light occurs  only after the shock 
wave reaches the stellar surface. 
> 
>  
> (Image credit: TeraScale Supernova Initiative.)
> 
>  However!
> 
> Even if you assume that the light and neutrinos were  created at the same 
time, but the visible light moved at c and the neutrinos  moved faster than 
light, which is why they got here first, know what value  you'd get for the 
speed of these neutrinos?
> 
> 1.0000000020 c,  which is inconsistent with the results from the OPERA 
collaboration.
>  
> Now, something fishy and possibly very interesting is going on, and  
there will certainly be scientists weighing in with new analysis in the coming  
weeks. But in all the excitement of this group declaring that they observe  
neutrinos moving faster than the speed of light, don't forget what we've  
already observed to much greater precision! And be skeptical of this result,  
and of the interpretation that neutrinos are moving faster than light, until 
 we know more.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Centroids: The Center of  the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
> Google Group:  http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
> Radical Centrism  website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

-- 
Centroids: The  Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group:  http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and  blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org


-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to