Slashdot Mirror


Faulty Cable To Blame For Superluminal Neutrino Results

smolloy writes "It would appear that the hotly debated faster-than-light neutrino observation at CERN is the result of a fault in the connection between a GPS unit and a computer. This connection was used to correct for time delays in the neutrino flight, and after fixing the correction the researchers have found that the time discrepancy appears to have vanished."

13 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. Glad they found the error by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am glad they went through the proper process of verifying all the hardware and have gotten to the bottom of this little fiasco - but wow, they have to be biting their lips in frustration.

    I also expect a cable manufacturer is likely to be getting a strongly worded email in the near future.

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    1. Re:Glad they found the error by c0lo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am glad they went through the proper process of verifying all the hardware and have gotten to the bottom of this little fiasco - but wow, they have to be biting their lips in frustration.

      Why is this a fiasco? After all they discovered a pretty cheap way for FTL - just use defective cables!

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:Glad they found the error by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm sure Denon will have a "faster than light" TOSLINK cable for sale for $1,000+ in no time. Better to get those audio bits before time itself.

    3. Re:Glad they found the error by gstrickler · · Score: 5, Informative

      The cable transmitted the signal 60ns faster than the time used in their compensation. I wouldn't call that defective.

      Either the cable is shorter than they thought, or it's propagation factor is higher than specified, or they simply used the wrong number in their original calculations.

      Way too early to blame anything on the cable manufacturer.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    4. Re:Glad they found the error by AndrewNeo · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're so fast they're already out!

    5. Re:Glad they found the error by rainmouse · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Suffice to say that science insists on verification.

      Except in the case of Global Warming. Where the overwhelming majority of the worlds science community is contradicted by a few rogues being funded by energy companies. It indicates that being insanely rich is a great way to get most of republican Americans to believe a world wide scientific conspiracy is more likely than the concept that energy firms may just be falsifying research to protect their profit margins.

      There I fixed it for you.

  2. Headline is wrong by Omnifarious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It should read "Faulty Cable Most Likely To Blame For Superluminal Neutrino Results". They haven't proved anything yet. They just found a problem that's very suggestive and they need to re-run the experiment after fixing/accounting for the problem.

    1. Re:Headline is wrong by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It should read "Faulty Cable Most Likely To Blame For Superluminal Neutrino Results". They haven't proved anything yet. They just found a problem that's very suggestive and they need to re-run the experiment after fixing/accounting for the problem.

      Part of the Scientific Method* is the ability to repeat your results. When they state "the time discrepancy appears to have vanished" it would seem they are unable to reproduce the prior results.

      *This Post Not Approved By Rick Santorum For President or Heartland Institute

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  3. Monster Cables by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's why I use Monster Cables for my neutrino experiments. It increases the roundness of the bass end, creates a punchier mid-range, and makes my neutrinos less superluminal.

  4. Re:Face it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We will never get off this rock. Interstellar travel is impossible, and always will be.

    We will all grow old and die here, and that's it.

    You must be a real blast at parties.

  5. Re:Face it by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey, leave poor Marvin alone. He has a brain the size of a planet and that makes up for his sometimes less than eager personality!

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  6. Re:Irresponsible use of the press by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These scientists were irresponsible in their dealings with their press.

    Bollocks, I am pretty sure it was always explained as an unexpected result, not a new discovery.

    They should have kept it strictly within the community

    How would they do that?

    rather than embarrass themselves, and physics, in this manner.

    It is far better for the public to see scientists acting openly, showing their data and asking for help. Science is a process, not a result. Trying to get the public to trust science by hiding things from them is precisely the wrong way to go about it. It is akin to suggesting they should trust the scientist because the scientist is always right rather than because the process of science works.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  7. Re:Face it by sneakyimp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ahem. *bullshit*.

    The heliopause, which has not yet been reached by Voyager 1 is apparently 23 x 10^9 km from earth. Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to our sun is 4.366 light years away which is 4.1306 x 10^13 km away.

    If it has taken 38 years for Voyager 1 to reach the Heliopause, it would take 1,795.9 times as long to reach Alpha Centauri at that speed which comes out to something like 68,000 years. I'm assuming a couple of things of course:
    * the speed so far is roughly the speed it will continue to travel
    * it can escape the sun's gravitational well.

    Suppose we are somehow miraculously able to accomplish the following:
    * we send a system powerful enough to transmit an intelligible signal to us across 4.5 light years of space
    * we somehow manage to travel 100 times faster than Voyager 1

    You're still talking about roughly 680 years for it to get there. There might be some tiny relativistic effects that come into play, but I doubt they would alter the situation much. Are you sending humans? If so, you have to dramatically increase the weight of the vehicle to accommodate life-sustaining water/air/energy in which case you also need shit loads of propellant if you want to slow down on the other end. Forget entirely about the difficulty of insuring the survival of roughly 20 generations of humans against the problems of cosmic radiation and health and reproductive problems related to roughly a millenium spent weightless and getting fried by space rays.