Slashdot Mirror
Neutrinos Travel No Faster Than Light, Says ICARUS
ananyo writes "Neutrinos obey nature's speed limit, according to new results from an Italian experiment. The finding, posted to the preprint server arXiv.org, contradicts a rival claim from the OPERA experiment that neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light. ICARUS, located just a few meters from OPERA, clocked neutrinos traveling at the speed of light, and no faster, after monitoring a beam of neutrinos sent from CERN in late October and early November of last year. The neutrinos were packed into pulses just four nanoseconds long. That meant the timing could be measured far more accurately than the original OPERA measurement, which used ten microsecond pulses. The new findings are yet another blow to OPERA's results. Researchers there had announced possible timing problems with their original measurements. For many, this will pretty much be case closed."
I mean, what kind of a bozo looks at an unexpected result, from an incredibly complex first-one, never-been-done before kind of a machine, and jumps to the conclusion "FASTER THAN LIGHT"!
I always assumes the faster than light shit wasn't an actual claim, just lazy reporters trying to hype up some attention and web clicks or what not.
I'm curious that neutrinos went the speed of light at all. IIRC, don't neutrinos have mass? Shouldn't it be impossible for anything with mass to go c?
If I remember my history correctly, they had a similar issue back in the 50-60's. In brief, some measurements they were making of neutrinos showed them traveling faster then light. Turned out to be time dilation on the part of the neutrinos that was screwing with the results.
People keep phrasing this like OPERA came out with a headline like "Neutrinos Travel Faster Than Light, and If You Disagree, You're a Stupid Doodyhead."
That is not what happened. OPERA basically said "Hey, we have this anomalous result that we don't really think could be right, but we looked at all our stuff and couldn't find the problem. Please help us fix this. Thanks."
I like how the submitter has turned it into a war of claims and rival claims. I seem to remember that OPERA was pretty sceptical about its own result right from the start.
In that experiment.
Until we know why they were measured as travelling faster than light and can repeat it, the mystery remains.
OK, perhaps slight trolling, but this is an example of why, on everything from evolution to climate change, I prefer the views of scientists to those of politicians or the religious authorities. This is an example of research happening exactly as it is intended to. Initial unexpected result, investigation, experimental flaw, better experiment. It creates a warm glow in the callous, hardened bit of my brain that was once a young, enthusiastic researcher.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
299,792,458 m /s. It's not just a good idea. It's the law.
"WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR?" ICARUS later asked, report startled French scientists.
The new findings are yet another blow to OPERA's results. Researchers there had announced possible timing problems with their original web browser. The latest benchmarks show it has abysmal performance and lacks the scalability and user friendliness of Internet Explorer 9. For many, this will pretty much be case closed.
The current theory is that neutrinos do not travel faster than light.
This experiment failed to invalidate that theory.
Therefore, this experiment supports that theory.
In order for a "mystery" to exist the "faster than light" experiment has to be repeatable.
They said they found that cable problem, but actually getting new results would require re-running the experiment with the fixed equipment, which doesn't happen overnight, so they can't just fix their result just like that.
Farnsworth is shouting "WERRNNNSTROMMMM!!!" and shaking his fist in the air
I could be mistaken, but I don't believe they've actually rerun the experiment since the issue was discovered, not even sure if the cable has actually been fixed yet.
...clocked neutrinos traveling at the speed of light, and no faster, after monitoring a beam of neutrinos sent from CERN in late October and early November of last year
Sent last year? I would say that puts the speed of neutrinos at considerably slower than the speed of light..
Aren't the GPS accurate to within 9ns? How can they be throwing out 4ns pulses?
"The new findings are yet another blow to OPERA's results. Researchers there had announced possible timing problems with their original measurements." I remember reading after the initial results that they were not sure, but just divulging their findings. Not making a clear cut case that neutrinos did, in fact, go faster than light. They took great pains to open their research and look for alternative answers.
Since neutrino's are not affected by gravity, they could still redefine what a straight line is.
On long distances they could still prove to be faster as they don't curve around gravity fields.
The sun eclipse experiment done with neutrinos emitted by distant stars instead of photons would be interesting.
Just went down in flames
They're back ordered on Monster Cable.
Have gnu, will travel.
I'm headed over to Usenet right now to tell them top posting is still not OK.
Have gnu, will travel.
How sad that its a big deal that the shuttles are meeting while switching buildings on the ground. If the space program in this country got the proper attention, we'd be making a big deal about two shuttles in space at once meeting with each other.
ICARUS is obsolete. After it has merged with DAEDELUS to become HELIOS, neutrinos will be properly calculated to move at super-liminal speeds.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
Einstein is still right, and Karl Marx is still dead. Nothing to see here folks, move along.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
Doesn't it also mean that it is very difficult to have a slow neutrino? You can hardly touch them and they're gone.
S
http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
If they were sent from CERN in October and November and they just got to ICARUS today, isn't that kind of slow? Clearly I am being facetious and obviously IANAS.
http://www.acetonestudio.com
So did it just occurred to them to look at the data now? ICARUS has weighted in before on this but this is the first time they have a speed measurement, and they are saying it's from the prior runs data. Since the argument was always over the speed of the neutrino and not whether or not the neutrino was emitting the expected radiation if it was going FTL I would have expected them to look at the speed measurement first. We'll at least see in May what the mass of the neutrino really is rather than leaving it the the Non-Zero mass.
Will we believe the lies from this instutution?
Fight for the future
El. Psy. Congroo!
Maybe it just takes neutrinos a while to "get going," if you know what I mean.
You can't expect them to perform after just 4ns.
p.s. On behalf of neutrinos everywhere, I'm also compelled to mention the water-related "shrinkage" phenomenon. Does the experiment account for that?
24 ICARUS workers won the MEGA Millions jackpot yesterday. One worker was asked how they picked the numbers and they said "they just came to us"
A neutrino walks into a bar, orders a pint, drinks it and leaves without any fuss.
Summation 2
"at the speed of light, and no faster" and "The time of flight difference between the speed of light and the arriving neutrino LAr-TPC events has been analysed. The result is compatible with the simultaneous arrival of all events with equal speed, the one of light."
For a non-massless particle, shouldn't travelling AT the speed of light still violate the formula? When v = c with mass, you're still dividing by 0.
Most people I know hadn't heard the faster-than-light neutrino story and when I told them, they said "No, that just can't be." I understand the jump to stand by this expirement, because for most of us it's like being told that the Sun doesn't rotate around the Earth. I'm a skeptic like all good boys and girls, so I think I'll wait wait a bit before jumping on any bandwagon. However, should superluminal neutrino believers begin to be burned at the stake, I will take a firm stand.
Just as a disclaimer: I *do* believe that God created the universe. I also believe that not only does He intervene, but He also holds the universe in existence, and is He intimately aware of everything that goes on.
I've seen enough evidence, for myself, that I couldn't believe otherwise. I've seen evidence that He actually loves his creation, and is Himself the definition of goodness. Proof? No. Evidence? Yes, though I won't go into it here.
But I also believe that our science is basically valid while at the same time being nowhere close to holding the complete truth. There's an eternity of digging yet to be done, and we still won't hold all truth. [That, by the way, is the Catholic definition of a Mystery. But I am saying that just as there is a terribly important Mystery of the Incarnation, there is also a much less important Mystery of God's Creation. Our search into that mystery is called Science, or sometimes Math. To be worthwhile, the search into the mystery of Creation has to be guided by insight, but limited by the rules of logic and reason: A goal, A Given, and {Statement/Reason]x N ]
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Y U NO GO FASTAR THAN LIGHT?!?!?!
I think they're just lazy, personally.
Science. It works.
Perfectly logical. Since the instruments they use are electronic based, they cannot capture any field effects of particles that actually do travel faster than the speed of light. Hence, they are limited by the current technology. Point to point time lapse testing is not sufficient.
It will require another Tesla to reveal any such field (e.g. hyperspace) and the appropriate prototyped technology. With our current political and educational system, that is unlikely. Tesla ignored the base curriculum at the Belgrade (or somewhere around there) Polytechnic University and reanalyzed the results of previous scientists/researchers a hundred before (Faraday especially) to come up with something more than DC and a new understanding of electrical current. You shouldn't need a PhD (Tesla didn't) to do this level of interesting inquiry.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.3433
"The result is compatible with the simultaneous arrival of all events with equal speed, the one of light."
ie. They said they clocked neutrinos going at the speed of light. Objects with mass, going the speed of light. Hello?! Is this thing on?! Anyone else get it?
Would've been interesting if they did go faster than light.
Yawn...
"That meant the timing could be measured far more accurately than the original OPERA measurement, which used ten microsecond pulses."
To be fair OPERA had access to the same and the results were the same so there is really no point at all in bringing this up unless it is your goal to trick the reader into thinking something about the quality of ICARUS vs OPERA that just aint so.
force = -grad U
so
U = int F dx
F = dp/dt
p=int F dt
if the Force is changing linearly eg F=ax ... you would get something like p = 1/2 ax^2 = mv
v = 1/2 a/m x^2
v=dx/dt
Int dx/x^2 = Int 1/2 a/m dt = 1/2 a/m t
-1/x = 1/2 a/m t
x= -2m/at ? hmm where is the mistake /. ?
I don't understand. The OPERA experiment blamed on a data link cable seems pretty specious and.. well let's demonstrate that then. In the mean time, how do we measure the passage of time itself? I see that it is not a quantized value; it is the measurement, not a thing to be measured; but it doesn't make sense to me. Events, such as a photon changing position, must occur in discrete intervals, right? How do we know nothing occurs during these intervals? This is a stupid question but I'm very curious for reference material. I'm not too dumb to understand the math, I just never really thought about the subject before, so fill me in on the details guys.
Me being chased by a rabid Wolverine.
Forgive my ignorance but as a layman I was under the impression that the only thing we've ever found to be going at exactly the speed of light was light.