• Neutrino experiment repeated at Cern - Finds same result
    68 replies, posted
[quote]The team behind the finding in September that neutrinos may travel faster than light has carried out an improved version of their experiment - and found the same result. If confirmed by other experiments, the find could undermine one of the basic principles of modern physics. Critics of the first report had said that the long bunches of neutrinos used could introduce an error into the test. The new work, posted to the Arxiv repository, used much shorter bunches. It has been submitted to the Journal of High Energy Physics, but has not yet been reviewed by the scientific community. The experiments have been carried out by the Opera collaboration - short for Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus. It hinges on sending bunches of neutrinos created at the Cern facility (actually produced as decays within a long bunch of protons produced at Cern) through 730km of rock to a giant detector at the Gran Sasso laboratory in Italy. The initial series of experiments, comprising 16,000 separate measurements spread out over three years, found that the neutrinos arrives 60 billionths of a second faster than light would have, travelling unimpeded over the same distance. The idea that nothing can exceed the speed of light in a vacuum forms a cornerstone in physics - first laid out by James Clerk Maxwell and later incorporated into Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity. Initial analysis of the work by the wider scientific community argued that the relatively long bunches of neutrinos could introduce a significant error into the measurement. Those bunches lasted 10 millionths of a second - 160 times longer than the discrepancy the team initially reported in the neutrinos' travel time. To address that, scientists at Cern adjusted the way in which the proton beams were produced, resulting in bunches just three billionths of a second long, so the Opera collaboration could repeat the measurements. 'Profound implication' The first announcement of evidently faster-than-light neutrinos caused a stir world-wide; the Opera collaboration is very aware of its implications if eventually proved correct. The error in the length of the bunches, however, is just the largest among several potential sources of uncertainty in the measurement that must all now be addressed in turn; these mostly centre on the precise departure and arrival times of the bunches. "A measurement so delicate and carrying a profound implication on physics requires an extraordinary level of scrutiny," said Fernando Ferroni, president of Italian Institute for Nuclear Physics in a statement. "The experiment Opera, thanks to a specially adapted Cern beam, has made an important test of consistency of its result. The positive outcome of the test makes us more confident in the result, although a final word can only be said by analogous measurements performed elsewhere in the world." Those measurements may be much longer in coming, as only a few facilities worldwide have the detectors needed to catch the notoriously flighty neutrinos - which interact with matter so rarely as to have earned the nickname "ghost particles". Next year, teams working on two other experiments at Gran Sasso experiments - Borexino and Icarus - will begin independent cross-checks of Opera's results. The US Minos experiment and Japan's T2K experiment will also test the observations. It is likely to be several months before they report back.[/quote] [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236]Ragu[/url] .
Here we go again.
This is great. Can't wait til we figure out why this is happening.
My faith in this is growing! :D
I thought they already disproved it?
Interesting results, especially with such a shortened bunch length. I'm interested in seeing the results of other, analogous tests done in different parts of the world with different sensors and different equipment when it can be made available. Surely there must be some base-line, calibration test with known results that the equipment can be put through to make sure it's turning up the correct results, but... I've not heard of such a test being performed since this whole fiasco started.
I will tranform into an neutrino and arrive at Alpha Centuari in a marginally shorter period of time!
Give these scientists a fucking medal.
I have my own theory on this: maybe photons are ever so slightly affected by gravity, and neutrinos are less (depending on what their mass actually is), causing this discrepancy, while photons in a full quantum vacuum would still go faster.
[QUOTE=Kendra;33327482]I have my own theory on this: maybe photons are ever so slightly affected by gravity, and neutrinos are less or simply aren't, causing this discrepancy, while photons in a full quantum vacuum would still go faster.[/QUOTE] well considering photons are massless spacetime is curvature as a result of mass and I'm rather sure that neutrinos aren't exactly the most massive particles
Photons are not massless as E = MC^2 ...... but I must say facepunch probably is not going to solve this one, cern are slightly better equipped to tackle the problem.
[QUOTE=Gizmodo456;33327528]Photons are not massless as E = MC^2 ...... but I must say facepunch probably is not going to solve this one, cern are slightly better equipped to tackle the problem.[/QUOTE] Relative mass =/= physical mass, photons have no actual mass. [editline]18th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Contag;33327501]well considering photons are massless[/QUOTE] Whether neutrinos have mass or not is one of the most debated subjects in particle physics though.
[QUOTE=Gizmodo456;33327528]Photons are not massless as E = MC^2 ...... but I must say facepunch probably is not going to solve this one, cern are slightly better equipped to tackle the problem.[/QUOTE] E = hf BAM
[QUOTE=Gizmodo456;33327528]but I must say facepunch probably is not going to solve this one,[/QUOTE] it's like relativity 101 and why the speed of light is (supposed be what are you doing neutrinos!) the limit of speed
[QUOTE=Kendra;33327482]I have my own theory on this: maybe photons are ever so slightly affected by gravity, and neutrinos are less (depending on what their mass actually is), causing this discrepancy, while photons in a full quantum vacuum would still go faster.[/QUOTE] I'm quite sure that a team of physicist that have considered the rotation of earth, the movement of tectonic plates and several less obvious factors, surely must have thought of photons being affected by earth.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;33327757]I'm quite sure that a team of physicist that have considered the rotation of earth, the movement of tectonic plates and several less obvious factors, surely must have thought of photons being affected by earth.[/QUOTE] *meanwhile at CERN* [img]http://chzallnighter.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/party-fails-ye-olde-drunks1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Kendra;33327482]I have my own theory on this: maybe photons are ever so slightly affected by gravity, and neutrinos are less (depending on what their mass actually is), causing this discrepancy, while photons in a full quantum vacuum would still go faster.[/QUOTE] Photons ARE effected by gravity... well, sorta. Not directly, but indirectly. Light travels along empty space in a straight line. When a large mass is present, space is warped, and the photons travel along the warped space. Well, I guess that IS direct interaction with gravity because that curving OF space by mass is what gravity is. So... yeah, photons are effected by gravity.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;33327757]I'm quite sure that a team of physicist that have considered the rotation of earth, the movement of tectonic plates and several less obvious factors, surely must have thought of photons being affected by earth.[/QUOTE] Earth, Sun, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, the Moon, etc. g = (G·M·m)/R^2 Gravity has an infinite range, it's just the further you get the less it's affected, exponentially, but it's still something you have to keep in mind. [editline]18th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=sltungle;33327812]Photons ARE effected by gravity... well, sorta. Not directly, but indirectly. Light travels along empty space in a straight line. When a large mass is present, space is warped, and the photons travel along the warped space. Well, I guess that IS direct interaction with gravity because that curving OF space by mass is what gravity is. So... yeah, photons are effected by gravity.[/QUOTE] Yes but that's obvious, but that doesn't necessarily affect their speed.
me, not being the sciencey type.. i don't quite understand what this means IF it is proved true yes, i understand about the whole "nothing is faster than light" and while this is quite intresting, what could we do with this if this indeed is fact?
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;33327865]me, not being the sciencey type.. i don't quite understand what this means IF it is proved true yes, i understand about the whole "nothing is faster than light" and while this is quite intresting, what could we do with this if this indeed is fact?[/QUOTE] Doesn't seem like there's many applications that could use this to their advantages.
[QUOTE=Kendra;33327814]Yes but that's obvious, but that doesn't necessarily affect their speed.[/QUOTE] No, of course not (it could APPEAR to lower their speed though depending on how warped the path is, but in reality it'd still be going exactly as fast), but I was just making sure he understands that it's not news that light is effected by gravity. Gravitational lensing has been observed for a very, very long time.
[QUOTE=MasterFen007;33327885]Doesn't seem like there's many applications that could use this to their advantages.[/QUOTE] not some kind of ultimate interweb broadband or lightspeed engines so we can zoom about space? joke/
They still haven't fixed the physics bug? Damn lazy people, I don't want neutrinos to be faster than light! [editline]lol[/editline] Lazy programming of the universe!
Well, this is pretty damn cool, but it was expected. They're doing it with essentially the same apparatus.
Shouldn't the neutrinos arrive before they were sent according to relativity?
[QUOTE=DrLuke2;33327933]Shouldn't the neutrinos arrive before they were sent according to relativity?[/QUOTE] Nope, not on short distances and time periods like these.
If this is really 100%. Isn't it true it changes EVERYTHING we know about physics?
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;33327898]not some kind of [B]ultimate interweb broadba[/B]nd or lightspeed engines so we can zoom about space? joke/[/QUOTE] Actually, this might be useful for just that if we wanted faster communications to the moon or mars if we ever get ourselves there.
Read up about this a while ago. Researched a bit on the subject and found the answer in Neutrino oscillation. This is a known fact and basically involves the changing of a Neutrinos "flavor" over macro distances. This happens because the different flavors have different masses, and so after a while, the lightest flavor will arrive first, be measured, the next flavor will then arrive and change the state of the Neutrino, turning it into a different flavor etc. If Neutrinos are found to be able to oscillate without mass, relativity is saved.
This doesn't really mean anything. Science is all about experiments being reproducible, in this case the same team of scientists repeated the experiment. Sure they proved that a few of the possible mistakes couldn't have happened, but we need an independent investigation before we can conclude anything at all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.