CERN claims faster-than-light particle measured

Palimino

Expert Member
Joined
May 27, 2009
Messages
4,995
Incredibly easy, hey? So when will you be verifying the results? :D

Actually, I don’t think it’s massively difficult (it will take more than a ruler and a piece of string however).

At one stage I was working with marine gyroscopes (direction seeking). When I left the company, the latest technology (wave of the future) was measuring the discrepancies in the speed & length of laser beams (3 beams in a triangular arrangement). Solid state (as opposed to my mechanical gyro knowledge) and super accurate. This was 20 years ago, so although I don’t know details I would imagine there have been improvements since then.
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
Intresting theory emerged. They missed one factor in calculations.....Gravity

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1109.6160

The CERN-OPERA experiment claims to have measured a one-way speed of neutrinos that is apparently faster than the speed of light c. One-way speed measurements such as these inevitably require a convention for the synchronisation of clocks in non-inertial frames since the Earth is rotating. We argue that the effect of the synchronisation convention is not properly taken into account in the OPERA analysis and may well invalidate their interpretation of superluminal neutrino velocity.

Also See http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

Less than two weeks after the revelation that ghostly particles called neutrinos had been spotted travelling faster than the speed of light, physicists are claiming to have found flaws in the analysis that would stop the claim in its tracks.

The extraordinary result came from the OPERA experiment (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus), situated 1,400 metres underground in the Gran Sasso National Laboratory in Italy (see 'Particles break light-speed limit'). There, scientists timed muon neutrinos arriving from CERN, Europe's particle physics facility near Geneva, Switzerland, some 731 kilometres away.

They were astonished to find the neutrinos arriving 60 nanoseconds earlier than a light beam travelling through a vacuum would have done — breaking what physicists had thought was an immutable cosmic speed limit1.

Since the OPERA group's 22 September announcement, more than 30 papers attempting to explain the result using various exotic theoretical models have been posted to the physics preprint server at ArXiv.org. But one paper2, posted on 28 September by theorist Carlo Contaldi of Imperial College London, bears the distinction of being the first to challenge the experimental calculations.

The OPERA team timed the neutrinos using clocks at each location that were synchronized using GPS (Global Positioning System) signals from a single satellite. Contaldi's paper says the group's calculations do not take into account one aspect of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity: that slight differences in the force of gravity at the two sites would cause the clocks to tick at different rates.

Because of its location relative to the centre of the Earth, the CERN site feels a slightly stronger gravitational pull than Gran Sasso. Consequently, a clock at the beginning of the neutrinos' journey would actually run at a slower rate than a clock at the end. "It would reduce the significance of the result," Contaldi says.

Dario Autiero of the Institute of Nuclear Physics in Lyons (IPNL), France, and physics coordinator for OPERA, counters that Contaldi's challenge is a result of a misunderstanding of how the clocks were synchronized. He says the group will be revising its paper to try to make its method clearer. Autiero notes that OPERA has been careful to present its startling observations without concluding that the laws of physics have been upended. His e-mail discussion with Contaldi — being followed by dozens of other physicists — is ongoing.
Going deep

Because two clocks are needed to time the neutrinos' journey — one at the beginning, and one at the end — they must be synchronized to within nanoseconds to get an accurate measurement, explains Toby Wiseman, a theoretical physicist also at Imperial College London. Measuring the speed of light on this journey would be much easier, because the beam can be reflected back to its origin, and the round trip timed with just one clock. "Whether they have or haven't synchronized their clocks correctly is the crucial question," says Wiseman.

Contaldi admits that his original analysis posted at ArXiv wrongly assumed that OPERA's timings relied on a clock being moved from one end of the beam to the other. But even synchronizing the clocks using GPS does not remove the difference in the time dilation effect, which Contaldi says could amount to tens of nanoseconds.

That effect would reduce the statistical significance — which OPERA claimed was six standard deviations — of the group's result (five is enough to count as strong evidence in the field of particle physics). Contaldi says the additional error would reduce that number to two or three standard deviations, enough to make only a tentative claim of a faster-than-light effect.

Wiseman says that the difficulty of the experiment and a lack of detail about clock synchronization in the initial OPERA paper may explain why so few critiques of the experiment methodology have been published so far, although more are probably on the way. "Carlo is pointing out how difficult it is to critique what has been done unless you're in the collaboration," he says.

Contaldi already has some company. On 2 October, Gilles Henri of the Institute of Planetary Science and Astrophysics in Grenoble, France, posted his own critique3. He argues that fluctuations in the beam of neutrinos could change the probability that Gran Sasso would detect them, and increase the uncertainty in their time of flight enough to produce the faster-than-light result. OPERA did not immediately respond to Nature 's request for comment on that paper.
 
Last edited:

Negate

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
894
There is no absolute speed barier. Einstein said it best with relativity. If everything else is relative then so to will the speed of light be

I believe in the existence of a physical force that drives light. Since all solar systems still revolve around a black hole, light might ride magnetic waves emminating from black holes. Thus the size and velocity of the gravitational(magnetic) fields emmited by the black hole can increase or decrease the speed of light. If the black hole in the center of our galaxy drives light, then different size galaxy might have different speeds of light. Einstein once hinted at the existence of gravitational waves, these to me sound like a perfect vechile to drive light.

Light being sucked in by black hole is being accelerated at higher speeds around that hole, increasing the speed of light. In the end light/electrons/data/digital waves they all need a field to function. Increase the charge of the field to increase the speed of the wave. These two objects are relative from each other so it should be common sense that speed of light is not limited to someone counting a few numbers together.

The speed of light and the speed of infrared from black holes might already be different. Both are unfortunately moving to fast for us to measure that measurable difference.

The speed of the spectrum of light is relative to the force driving it! Thatch why we have a spectrum, because each light wave is being driven at different intensities.
 
Last edited:

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
CERN.... there is an Android app for that.

Literally https://market.android.com/details?id=com.lhsee

LHSee - Big bang science in your pocket

Want to find out how to Hunt the Higgs Boson using your phone? Ever wondered how the Large Hadron Collider experiments work, and what the collisions look like?
LHSee app on mobile phone

Scientists at the world's biggest scientific experiment - the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) (link opens in a new window)at CERN (link opens in a new window), Geneva - are trying to answer fundamental questions about the nature of the Universe, the origin of mass, the structure of space and time, and the conditions of the early universe. For those of us not lucky enough to have the world's highest energy particle smasher in our own back gardens, we can still get close to the action using an exciting new smartphone App.

The new App, called 'LHSee (link opens in a new window)', makes the LHC accessible to anybody with a smartphone or tablet PC running the Google Android operating system. Written by Oxford University scientists in collaboration with the ATLAS (link opens in a new window), one of the four LHC experiments at CERN, it has been designed for experts and non-experts alike. The project was funded by the STFC through its Small Awards grant scheme.

For the first time you can now grab live collision events from the underground detectors in Geneva, and beam them direct to your own device. As well as a variety of educational resources, the application allows you to interact with the collision events in full 3D graphics. You can also find out how the different parts of the detector work, learn how to identify different types of collision, and even put your new skills to the test by playing the 'Hunt the Higgs' game.

Dr Alan Barr of the University of Oxford says: "I love the detail in the live displays - it's amazing to see that you can pick out the different individual proton collisions."

With help from their international friends within the ATLAS collaboration, the developers offer the App with language support not just in English, but also in French, German, Italian, Spanish and Swedish.

The App will be free to download from the Google Android Marketplace (link opens in a new window) from Friday 7th October 2011.

From: http://www.stfc.ac.uk/News and Events/37666.aspx
 

Archer

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
22,423
The speed of the spectrum of light is relative to the force driving it! Thatch why we have a spectrum, because each light wave is being driven at different intensities.

What?? No, we have a light spectrum becuase different wavelengths have different colours... It has nothing to do with intensity

As for the rest, it makes little to no sense. Like, not all solar systems revolve around black holes... Galaxy M33 likely does not have one, and yet light is travelling around quite happily in there, seeing how the galaxy was discovered with the Hubble telescope.
 

Bobbin

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
9,477
Why does light travel anyway :p

There is my stupid question for the day :D
 

bekdik

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
12,860
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/journal/CERNBulletin/2011/41/News Articles/1387897?ln=en

So far, the main reactions have focused on the Earth’s rotational effects, subtle general relativity issues, the technology used to measure time and distance, and the analysis methods. “After carefully considering all these points, we still have no indication of any large systematic effect that we could have overlooked. However, we are just at the beginning of the screening process by the community and we will have to wait longer,” says Ereditato.


The scientific response


The Bulletin has contacted some of the experiments around the world that are likely to reproduce the OPERA’s measurement. Here follows their statements:

Borexino

Borexino is installed in the same LNGS underground hall (Hall C), about 20 metres upstream of the OPERA experiment with respect to the neutrino flight direction from CERN. The volume of the Borexino detector is larger than that of OPERA, and Borexino is able to collect a larger number of events produced by CERN neutrinos.

The main goal of the Borexino experiment is the study of solar neutrinos and geoneutrinos. At present, the experiment is not equipped with the special timing devices required to measure the neutrino time-of-flight from CERN with the accuracy required to cross-check the OPERA results, which would be possible only by installing new timing devices.

After preliminary discussions, the Borexino Collaboration has expressed interest in performing an independent measurement to cross-check the result from OPERA. However, the discussion has barely started and is still ongoing. A decision has not been yet been made.

In an optimistic scenario, the Collaboration could be in a position to collect data by the start of the beam run in February 2012, but this depends on the successful implementation of necessary improvements, which cannot be fully evaluated at this time.

LVD

The LVD Collaboration has a great interest in the issue raised by the recent OPERA measurement. The experiment, designed to detect gravitational stellar collapses, can also detect neutrinos from the CERN beam. However, the Collaboration has to evaluate carefully if it can contribute a significant result with their detector as it is, or if it has to change, modify or add some detector parts.

T2K

Based on an initial assessment of the experiment’s current capability, T2K cannot make any definitive statement to verify the OPERA measurement of the speed of neutrino. The Collaboration will assess the possibility of improving their experimental sensitivity in order to cross-check the OPERA anomaly in the future. Such a measurement with an improved system, however, could take a while to achieve.

MINOS

The MINOS Collaboration is planning to improve its measurement of the neutrino time-of-flight since its last result in 2007, with better-controlled systematics and about 10 times more data. The first update should be in about 6 months. There will be a further improvement (which was already planned) for the MINOS+ experiment, starting in 2013, which will take very high statistics, and higher energy data. This should give a total error of 5-10 ns on the final measurement.
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
I think the best method to prove the timing issue would be either to use a single clock, something we cant do in this case as it will be dam hard to bounce the neutrino's or run a second experiment in the opposite direction at the same time.

Till then people will keep on blaming the accuracy in the measurements.
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
26,879
The buzz around this story is rather silly, methinks. The CERN folks might have some grasp of particle scatters, but news and PR scatters are another ballgame. They went critical too quickly (with the news story), and I fear they'll end up with prosoponic egg-splatters and the public face of science will have suffered, I fear. Too many other experiments disconfirm these results (eg Koshiba). So far, it seems three main areas are getting a much closer look: 1. gravity pockets and whorls insufficiently considered, and 2. stats models for detecting v arrival, 3. in any case we don't know whether v is massless or not.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
92,823
Faster-than-light neutrino experiment to be run again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15471118

28 October 2011 Last updated at 07:51 GMT

Faster-than-light neutrino experiment to be run again
By Paul Rincon
Science editor, BBC News website

Scientists who announced that sub-atomic particles might be able to travel faster than light are to rerun their experiment in a different way.

This will address criticisms and allow the physicists to shore up their analysis as much as possible before submitting it for publication.

Dr Sergio Bertolucci said it was vital not to "fool around" given the staggering implications of the result.

So they are doing all they can to rule out more pedestrian explanations.

Physicists working on the Opera experiment announced the perplexing findings last month.

Neutrinos sent through the ground from Cern (the home of the Large Hadron Collider) in Geneva toward the Gran Sasso laboratory 732km away in Italy seemed to show up a tiny fraction of a second earlier than light would have.

Continue reading the main story

Start Quote

It's like sending a series of loud and isolated clicks instead of a long blast on a horn”

Prof Matt Strassler
Rutgers University
The speed of light is widely regarded as the Universe's ultimate velocity limit. Outlined first by James Clerk Maxwell and then by Albert Einstein in his theory of special relativity, much of modern physics relies on the idea that nothing can travel faster than light.

For many, the most comforting explanation is that some repeated "systematic error" has so far eluded the experimenters.

Since September, more than 80 scientific papers about the finding have been posted to the arXiv pre-print server. Most propose theoretical solutions for the observation; a few claim to find problems.

Dr Bertolucci, the director of research at Cern, told BBC News: "In the last few days we have started to send a different time structure of the beam to Gran Sasso.

"This will allow Opera to repeat the measurement, removing some of the possible systematics."

The neutrinos that emerge at Gran Sasso start off as a beam of proton particles at Cern. Through a series of complex interactions, neutrino particles are generated from this beam and stream through the Earth's crust to Italy.
 

scotty777

...doesn't know
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
9,285
On the topic of quantum mechanics,what do guys think of Poincare,Maxwell,Lorenz and Hilbert.

Poincare- never heard of
Maxwell- the guy that actually got the ball rolling
Lorenz - Without his proofs, Einstein would have been stumped
Hilbert - again, my knowledge fails me

you forgot Schrodinger, as his little equation is what allowed us to understand just wtf atoms are doing with they jizz out them photons, or how the electrons rotate around a nucleus... Even the ideas of Energy levels, and the photo-electric effect, all explained by one, fundamental equation... Remember, these were all physical happenings that until Schrodinger's equation came along, could not be explain at all - magic would have offered a better definition before Schrodinger :p
 

bekdik

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
12,860
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1110/1110.2685v3.pdf

We showed that a potential correction to the OPERA experiment [5] is obtained if we hypothesize
that they measure the Lorentz transformation-corrected time of flight as measured from a clock
in a non-stationary orbit. If correct, the total correction found explains most of the discrepancy
between the time of flight the OPERA team observed and the time of flight they expected. Admittedly,
the calculation here presented contains some simplifying assumptions. A full treatment
should take into account the varying angle between the GPS satellite’s velocity vector and the
CERN-Gran Sasso baseline. We expect that such a full treatment will yield a somewhat smaller
value for the average correction. In addition, such a full analysis should be able to predict the
correlation between the GPS satellite position(s) and the observed time of flight, and should take
into account all technical details of the GPS-based timing methodology used.
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
26,879
Fascinating stuff this. Roll on science. But philosophical implications are highly speculative.
 
Top