Page 1 of 5

Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:28 pm
by Slammr (imported)
It is a concept that forms a cornerstone of our understanding of the universe and the concept of time – nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

But now it seems that researchers working in one of the world's largest physics (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics) laboratories, under a mountain in central Italy, have recorded particles travelling at a speed that is supposedly forbidden by Einstein's theory of special relativity.

Scientists at the Gran Sasso facility will unveil evidence on Friday that raises the troubling possibility of a way to send information back in time, blurring the line between past and present and wreaking havoc with the fundamental principle of cause and effect.

They will announce the result at a special seminar at Cern (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/cern) – the European particle physics (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/particlephysics) laboratory – timed to coincide with the publication of a research paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897) (pdf (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4897v1)) describing the experiment.

Researchers on the Opera (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus) experiment recorded the arrival times of ghostly subatomic particles called neutrinos sent from Cern on a 730km journey through the Earth to the Gran Sasso lab.

The trip would take a beam of light 2.4 milliseconds to complete, but after running the experiment for three years and timing the arrival of 15,000 neutrinos, the scientists discovered that the particles arrived at Gran Sasso sixty billionths of a second earlier, with an error margin of plus or minus 10 billionths of a second.

The measurement amounts to the neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light by a fraction of 20 parts per million. Since the speed of light is 299,792,458 metres per second, the neutrinos were evidently travelling at 299,798,454 metres per second.

The result is so unlikely that even the research team is being cautious with its interpretation. Physicists said they would be sceptical of the finding until other laboratories confirmed the result.

Antonio Ereditato, coordinator of the Opera collaboration, told the Guardian: "We are very much astonished by this result, but a result is never a discovery until other people confirm it.

"When you get such a result you want to make sure you made no mistakes, that there are no nasty things going on you didn't think of. We spent months and months doing checks and we have not been able to find any errors.

"If there is a problem, it must be a tough, nasty effect, because trivial things we are clever enough to rule out."

The Opera group said it hoped the physics community would scrutinise the result and help uncover any flaws in the measurement, or verify it with their own experiments.

Subir Sarkar, head of particle theory at Oxford University, said: "If this is proved to be true it would be a massive, massive event. It is something nobody was expecting.

"The constancy of the speed of light essentially underpins our understanding of space and time and causality, which is the fact that cause comes before effect."

The key point underlying causality is that the laws of physics as we know them dictate that information cannot be communicated faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, added Sarkar.

"Cause cannot come after effect and that is absolutely fundamental to our construction of the physical universe. If we do not have causality, we are buggered."

The Opera experiment detects neutrinos as they strike 150,000 "bricks" of photographic emulsion films interleaved with lead plates. The detector weighs a total of 1300 tonnes.

Despite the marginal increase on the speed of light observed by Ereditato's team, the result is intriguing because its statistical significance, the measure by which particle physics discoveries stand and fall, is so strong.

Physicists can claim a discovery if the chances of their result being a fluke of statistics are greater than five standard deviations, or less than one in a few million. The Gran Sasso team's result is six standard deviations.

Ereditato said the team would not claim a discovery because the result was so radical. "Whenever you touch something so fundamental, you have to be much more prudent," he said.

Alan Kostelecky, an expert in the possibility of faster-than-light processes at Indiana University, said that while physicists would await confirmation of the result, it was none the less exciting.

"It's such a dramatic result it would be difficult to accept without others replicating it, but there will be enormous interest in this," he told the Guardian.

One theory Kostelecky and his colleagues put forward in 1985 predicted that neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light by interacting with an unknown field that lurks in the vacuum.

"With this kind of background, it is not necessarily the case that the limiting speed in nature is the speed of light," he said. "It might actually be the speed of neutrinos and light goes more slowly."

Neutrinos are mysterious particles. They have a minuscule mass, no electric charge, and pass through almost any material as though it was not there.

Kostelecky said that if the result was verified – a big if – it might pave the way to a grand theory that marries gravity with quantum mechanics, a puzzle that has defied physicists for nearly a century.

"If this is confirmed, this is the first evidence for a crack in the structure of physics as we know it that could provide a clue to constructing such a unified theory," Kostelecky said.

Heinrich Paes, a physicist at Dortmund University, has developed another theory that could explain the result. The neutrinos may be taking a shortcut through space-time, by travelling from Cern to Gran Sasso through extra dimensions. "That can make it look like a particle has gone faster than the speed of light when it hasn't," he said.

But Susan Cartwright, senior lecturer in particle astrophysics at Sheffield University, said: "Neutrino experimental results are not historically all that reliable, so the words 'don't hold your breath' do spring to mind when you hear very counter-intuitive results like this."

Teams at two experiments known as T2K in Japan and MINOS near Chicago in the US will now attempt to replicate the finding. The MINOS experiment saw hints of neutrinos moving at faster than the speed of light in 2007 but has yet to confirm them.

• This article was amended on 23 September 2011 to clarify the relevance of the speed of light to causality.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44629271/ns ... e-science/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/ ... sfeed=true

If this is true, it will change our most basic concept: that nothing can exceed the speed of light in a vacuum.

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:26 pm
by Dave (imported)
And the researchers are so startled and in many ways so skeptical of their own results that they are asking all physicists capable of understanding the experiment to disprove it.

This is a case to watch but don't get your hopes up or down.

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 4:30 pm
by moi621 (imported)
A neutrino has no mass.

Relativity equates mass increasing as the speed of light is approached.

This astronomical mass forbids surpassing the speed of light.

With no mass and no charge; Why not? How is it contrary to Einstein? 💡

Moi

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 6:55 pm
by Dave (imported)
moi621 (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 4:30 pm A neutrino has no mass.

Relativity equates mass increasing as the speed of light is approached.

This astronomical mass forbids surpassing the speed of light.

With no mass and no charge; Why not? How is it contrary to Einstein? 💡

Moi

E=Mc*c or c-squared.

That equation is considered a constant in Einsteinian physics... you might recognize it as The Theory or Relativity.

It holds the relationship between energy and mass as a function of the square of speed of light.

When you get inside the theory, you discover that the "relativistic" name means motion relative to an observer and motion is relative since all of the the frames are moving and not stationary. And that motion cannot be faster than the speed of light. The speed of light is invariant in the macro universe.

That isn't true at the Quantum Mechanics level of matter. Think of Quantum Entanglement.

Quantum Mechanics and Relativity don't like each other -- one is macro and one is micro but the restriction on both is the speed of light.

To any observer, there is a fixed distance that light can go out and return. It's like looking in front of the car when driving. However, at near light speeds, to shine a light backwards (to look in the rear view mirror) is good only for short distances because light has to bounce back to the sender (the driver of the car) and at nine tenths the speed of light, only certain parts of the universe are visible. Light just can't travel that fast.

However, if neutrinos can travel faster than light, then we can see what happened behind us in time, so to speak.

It would help if I had a blackboard.

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 7:28 pm
by Slammr (imported)
A neutrino ( English pronunciation: /njuːˈtriːnoʊ/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English),Italian pronunciation: [neuˈtriːno] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_Italian)) is an electrically neutral, weakly interacting elementary subatomic particle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle)[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino#cite_note-0) with a small but non-zero mass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

A neutrino does have mass.

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:00 pm
by Dave (imported)
And to go back to my explanation, if your are traveling at nine tenths the speed of light, then sending a light beam forward to see something (remember, the light goes out at light speed from your perspective, is reflected and comes back at the same speed) you can only see a limited distance ahead because he light won't go faster than the speed of light "c" and you are already going nine tenths of that speed.

Think of an observer outside the spaceship watching the whole affair. He sees you slow down (that's the famous Time Dilation Effect of Relativity) and your light beam slow down. Thus you don't go faster than the speed of light.

What does that have to do with anything in this thread? Well the neutrino beam that the scientists sent out might not be going
Slammr (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:28 pm faster than the speed of light in a vacuum
because they are in the wrong moving frame.

And another reason might be that the path of the beam passes through a funky section of space that is not a vacuum and permits neutrinos to travel faster than light.

Perhaps the entire speed of light we have measured is not correct because the light all around us is traveling through a medium and that slows it by 60 billionths of a second over the speed of neutrinos in this medium.

Feel like Alice yet? (that's supposed to be a funny remark)...

Now when a physicist starts to combine all the effects into one theory of space, time, gravity, magnetism and electricity, the limiting factor of the speed light plays havoc with the teeny, tiny stuff called Quantum Mechanics and the speed of light also causes Einsteinian physics and Quantum Mechanics to break down at black holes... Thus our scientific explanations of the largest and the smallest of things is governed by that special equation E=Mc-squared

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:39 pm
by moi621 (imported)
Slammr (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 7:28 pm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

A neutrino does have mass.

That wasn't the Neutrino I learned about when UCI professor, Frederick Reines, was looking for them in the seventies.

Someone changed Neutrinos on me. Next thing y'know they're going to add a "charge" too.

Moi

Free the Neutrino 📢

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:41 pm
by Slammr (imported)
moi621 (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:39 pm That wasn't the Neutrino I learned about when
that UCI professor
moi621 (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:39 pm was looking for them in the seventies.

Someone changed Neutrinos on me. Next thing y'know they're going to add a "charge" too.

Moi

Free the Neutrino 📢

That answers my questions about you, Moi. You're still living in the 70s.

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:54 pm
by moi621 (imported)
Slammr (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:41 pm That answers my questions about you, Moi. You're still living in the 70s.

Yes I do miss the twentieth century, when Neutrinos had no mass, among other fond memories.

Moi

Re: Was Einstein Wrong?

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:20 am
by Riverwind (imported)
Like when Pluto was a planet?

When Lassie knew where to find the red handled screwdriver in the kitchen drawer and was female?

When westerns had six shooters that shot 700 rounds never needing to be reloaded?

Where the greatest toy a kid could get for Christmas was a slinky?

And TV was in beautiful Black and White.

Oh yes, I miss those days too, were gas was 16 cents a gallon, but then again a good pay was $50 a week.

Come to think about it there was nothing good about the good old days, I would never want to go back for one thing we did not have PC's and that alone would stop me cold. On the other hand, it would stop Moi too...........

River