>From the CERN paper, all the neutrinos stated out as muon neutrinos and where received as muon neutrinos without flavor change to tau neutrinos. So no flavor changing occurred.
The speed of the muon neutrinos was not a function of their energy either. These results rule out the MSW effect as a possible cause. Also there was no opportunity for quantum data transfer to occur via entanglement after muon neutrino creation. These result shoots my aforementioned speculations down and makes the CERN results far more deliciously curious. On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect (often referred to as the matter > effect) is a particle physics process which can act to modify neutrino > oscillations in matter. The work by American physicist Lincoln Wolfenstein > in 1978 and the work by Soviet physicists Stanislav Mikheyev and Alexei > Smirnov in 1986 led to an understanding of this effect. Later in 1986, > Stephen Parke of Fermilab provided the first full analytic treatment of this > effect. > > In a nutshell, high energy neutrinos change flavors at a higher rate when > traveling through a dense medium then low energy neutrinos do. > > Also, the rate of flavor change is low for a neutrino of any energy level > in a vacuum. > > The flavor change is analogous to the electromagnetic process leading to > the refractive index of light in a medium. This means that neutrinos in > matter have a different effective mass than neutrinos in vacuum, and since > neutrino oscillations depend upon the squared mass difference of the > neutrinos being transformed, neutrino oscillations may be different in > matter than they are in vacuum. > > When these quntum particles transit dense media, whereas light slows down, > neutrinos may speed up. > > The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect will lead to different flavor > change rates detected in neutrinos from a super-nova traveling through a > vacuum verses neutrino flavor change rates seen when neutrinos penetrate > dense media. > > For high-energy solar neutrinos the MSW effect is important. This was > dramatically confirmed in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory, where the solar > neutrino problem was finally solved. There it was shown that only ~34% of > the electron neutrinos (measured with one charged current reaction of the > electron neutrinos) reach the detector, whereas the sum of rates for all > three neutrinos (measured with one neutral current reaction) agrees well > with the expectations. > > If neutrinos undergoing flavor change are entangled via coherent forward > scattering which I strongly suspect, then the speed that these entangled > virtual particle pairs cover distance during the flavor change (quantum > information exchange) could be far faster than C ( light speed). See my post > above. > > That is to say, neutrinos changing their flavor will go very fast (at warp > speed) for a very short period of time during flavor change then once flavor > change is complete, continue to move along indefinably at light speed. > > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mauro Lacy <ma...@lacy.com.ar> wrote: > >> On 09/24/2011 11:04 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: >> >>> The New Scientist article, "Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to >>> cheat light speed", here: >>> >>> http://www.newscientist.com/**article/dn20957-dimensionhop-**may-allow-<http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20957-dimensionhop-may-allow-> >>> neutrinos-to-cheat-light-**speed.html >>> >>> suggest dimension hops as the means for neutrinos traveling faster >>> than light, as measured in the CERN OPERA experiment, described by >>> Adam et al., "Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA >>> detector in the CNGS beam" here: >>> >>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 >>> >>> The arrival time of the neutrinos across a 730 km distance was 60.7 >>> ns early, representing 2.48x10^-5 relative difference vs light travel >>> time. >>> >>> This measurement conflicts with early arrival time data for neutrinos >>> from supernova. The New Scientist article quotes Marc Sher of the >>> College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, "It's not >>> reasonable." ... "If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they >>> would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is >>> crazy," says Sher. "They didn't." >>> >>> This implies a difference in travel speed in matter vs vacuum for the >>> neutrinos. >>> >>> >> >> That's a possibility. Another is that this implies an extra difference in >> travel speed in air vs. vacuum for light. >> The electromagnetic signals sent by the gps systems are delayed a little >> bit more than expected according to current theory. And that becomes >> apparent only when compared with neutrino speeds, which are unaffected. This >> is consistent with the Cahill and Kitto paper about the non-null results of >> Michelson & Morley type experiments and the relation with the refractive >> index of the medium: >> http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/**0205065<http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0205065> >> Interestingly, the 7.5 km/s reported difference in neutrino speed is in >> good agreement with the 8 km/s result estimated for Michelson & Morley type >> experiments in air. >> >> And a third possibility: the underground distance estimation between >> laboratories is wrong according to current theory. This can be the case, by >> example, if unaccounted for length contraction is happening due to >> gravitational effects. I would search for the difference in height between >> both laboratories, the way to estimate length contraction due to >> gravitational effects, and the estimated intensity of the gravitational >> field at the neutrino beam mean travel depth. >> >> Regards, >> Mauro >> >> >
