Slashdot Mirror


Particle Physicists Confirm Arrow of Time Using B Meson Measurements

ananyo writes with bad news for John Titor. From the article: "Four years after its closure, researchers working with data from the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center's particle physics experiment BaBar have used the data to make the first direct measurement confirming that time does not run the same forwards as backwards — at least for the B mesons that the experiment produced during its heyday. The application of quantum mechanics to fundamental particles rests on a symmetry known as CPT, for charge-parity-time, which states that fundamental processes remain unchanged when particles are replaced by their antimatter counterparts (C), left and right are reversed (P), and time runs in the reverse direction (T). Violations of C and P alone were first seen in radioactive decays in the 1950s, and BaBar was used to confirm violations of CP in B meson decays in 2001. To keep CPT intact, that implies that time reversal is also violated, but finding ways to compare processes running forward and backward in time has proven tricky. Theoretical physicists at the Universityof Valencia in Spain worked with researchers on BaBar to exploit the fact that the experiment had generated entangled quantum states of the meson Bzero and its antimatter counterpart Bzero-bar, which then evolved through several different decay chains. By comparing the rates of decay in chains in which one type of decay happened before another, with others in which the order was reversed, the researchers were able to compare processes that were effectively time reversed version of each other. They report in Physical Review Letters today that they see a violation of time reversal at an extremely high level of statistical significance."

48 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Arrow of Time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Arrow of Time confirmed... Wheel of Time fans disappointed.

    1. Re:Arrow of Time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thus is our treaty written; thus is agreement made.
      Thought is the arrow of time; memory never fades.
      What was asked is given; the price is paid.

    2. Re:Arrow of Time... by Nyder · · Score: 3, Funny

      Arrow of Time confirmed... Wheel of Time fans disappointed.

      I've been disappointed since I realized the books were very engaging, exceptionally self-consistent, and... not only sexist but was a central component of the story. That sorta ruined it for me.
      -- A sad panda geek girl.

      yep, I noticed the women in the story were very mean to men...

      --
      Be seeing you...
    3. Re:Arrow of Time... by haruchai · · Score: 3, Funny

      Really? A gay faggot? Is that anything like a straight heterosexual or just a very ecstatic bundle of twigs?

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    4. Re:Arrow of Time... by socceroos · · Score: 2

      Sexist? C'mon, seriously? Women were construed in a particular light were they? But, so were men? Granted, Robert had some funny views and an odd angle to things, but both sexes were firmly put in boxes. No need to get your knickers in a knot.

    5. Re:Arrow of Time... by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hardly. Recognizing that there are differences between the sexes is common sense. Judging people's values and defining their roles solely by their sexes is sexism.

      Women and men are not equal in everything. Trying to see equality in everything because it fits your notion of symmetry, fairness or whatever is self-delusion.

    6. Re:Arrow of Time... by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Hardly. Recognizing that there are differences between the sexes is common sense. Judging people's values and defining their roles solely by their sexes is sexism.

      Those "differences" are provably superficial and purely cultural -as well proven by other cultures having radically different role expectations from sexes and both sexes playing into those different expectations with the same level as they do to the ones in ours.
      Hell even in our own subcultures this view is greatly challenged. Consider for example the highly androgynous gender-roles of the metal and goth cultures - or the outright girly look of glam metal (which then ironically became equated with having the "guts to be glam" - the MOST masculine thing a man could do was to act feminine).

      No my friend, the differences between the sexes exist only in the physical form.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    7. Re:Arrow of Time... by fredprado · · Score: 2

      That is what you want to believe. Unfortunately for you that is not the truth. Obviously there are cultural aspects that influence roles, but many of these cultural aspects are stemmed on physical differences and even in the absence of culture experiments have proven time and again that men's and women's instincts and thought processes have distinct differences. There is no motive to take offence on that as different is not necessarily better or worse.

  2. Reading the Article Backwards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, reading the article backwards still results in WTF?

    1. Re:Reading the Article Backwards... by marcosdumay · · Score: 2

      Whan read backwards it sounds like a foreign language and I can't understand a word. Thus, no change in that.

      Now, seriously, the paper's abstract makes more sense than the article. And it is heavy in a jargon that I don't completely understand, while the article was arguably translated into normal english. What a bad translation!

    2. Re:Reading the Article Backwards... by avgjoe62 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Funny - I read the article backward and I got that Paul is dead.

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    3. Re:Reading the Article Backwards... by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's my take on it:

      In theory the basic mathematics of quantum theory is time-symmetric. You can write equations to describe particles x and y colliding to produce a and b, and those equations work perfectly well to describe particles a and b colliding to produce x and y. It's why Feynman diagrams are so useful, you can just flip the time dimension around and see something else described by the same maths.

      The point of what these folks have done is to look very closely at one particular Feynman diagram, that of the B meson decay, and showing that it is not time symmetric in some way. So the flow of time is something extra on top of the basic quantum theory...that's fascinating.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    4. Re:Reading the Article Backwards... by Rakshasa-sensei · · Score: 2

      Except the real point of the story is that since B mesons were not symmetrical for C and P, then finding out that it was symmetrical for T would mean that quantum theory isn't symmetrical.

      Basically the particle needs to be non-symmetrical for all three of CPT, or none (which we know it isn't), else there is as you say 'something extra on top of the basic quantum theory'.

  3. I Wish by NEDHead · · Score: 4, Funny

    They would be more specific about the arrow of time. I get that they have confirmed it and all, but which direction is it pointing?

    1. Re:I Wish by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Informative

      They would be more specific about the arrow of time. I get that they have confirmed it and all, but which direction is it pointing?

      As I understand it (greatly simplified), time is a consequence of matter and energy interactions in space; They don't all happen at once though because of separation, and the distance (relative or absolute) between them is what creates time. That's why they call it 'spacetime'; The smallest unit of time then is the fastest change in quantum state possible. As time is a byproduct of matter and energy interactions, and couldn't exist without it, there's still the question of the "arrow of time". We perceive it to be always moving "forward", but there's no reason why the reaction A-B-C shouldn't go C-B-A as well, or instead.

      If I understand this experiment correctly, what they're saying is "as well" is bogus. It's not just that it isn't observable, but that it just doesn't happen. No matter which way the reaction chain goes, there's no mirror reaction that goes unobservable. But perhaps someone who actually is a particle physicist could provide a layman explanation better than mine... I'll be honest: Most of what they do is beyond my grasp because they talk mostly in math and seem to eschew visualization or story explanation. -_-

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:I Wish by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      Left if you're facing one way, but right if you're facing it from the other side. If you're facing it head-on or are behind it, you're holding your time wrong.

    3. Re:I Wish by TexVex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The arrow of time is the reason why random bits of shrapnel and chemicals don't fly together and "un-detonate" to become hand grenades. In one direction of time, entropy in the universe always increases; in the other, it always decreases. The question is, why? If everything at the quantum level always worked the same way forwards as it does backwards, then entropy would be constant; the universe would be in some kind of steady state and nothing would matter because we wouldn't be here.

      I think at this stage of research, it's more about finding clues than it is about trying to put them together into a coherent explanation. But if that's not true, I'd love to hear from someone who really knows this stuff..

      --
      Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
    4. Re:I Wish by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      The question is, why? If everything at the quantum level always worked the same way forwards as it does backwards, then entropy would be constant; the universe would be in some kind of steady state and nothing would matter because we wouldn't be here.

      Maybe the universe was bored with the idea... :\

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    5. Re:I Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Take a video of some physical process and run it in reverse. At a macro level we humans can generally tell that the video is in reverse - tea cups break apart when hitting a floor, they don't spontaneously assemble and then fly off the floor. However, if you analyze such situations using the physics you learned in high school, there is no way to tell that the course of events has been reversed - statistically it's very unlikely that a tea cup would do that, but there is nothing physically impossible about it. So it appear that the laws of physics are the same if time was running in reverse yet to us humans it does not appear that things would be the same if time was running in reverse - because of entropy.

      This is the problem of the arrow of time - how can we tell in a physical way which way time is running? Is there any way to distinguish going forward in time to going backward in time using just physical laws? You could say that entropy increases with time (the basis of how we humans can tell on a video whether it is running forward or backward), but that is only a statistical observation and it only holds because it just happens to be that our past has a very small amount of entropy compared to the high entropy situation that the universe will eventually reach. Increasing entropy is a consequence of an accident of what our past looks like and it is not a physical law in the strict sense we are looking for here. So entropy is not a good candidate. This research shows a way that you actually CAN tell if time is running in reverse. Though physicists still believe that there is a CPT symmetry, indicating that if you reverse time and also two other things, then there is no way to tell from physical laws that you did that.

    6. Re:I Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't really know this stuff that well. I did well in quantum computing, which covers the philosophy of the quantum postulates, but never really gets past baby level physics. That said, I've been thinking that maybe there's a bit more to flip than C, P, and T to get a better picture.

      If you think of an explosion starting at time 0 and centered at [0,0,0], you start with density concentrated around that point and over time it spreads out from that point. Alternatively, starting at time t and going backwards to time 0, you see the dispersed mass flowing to concentrate at that point.

      However, another picture is that starting at time 0, a lack of matter begins flowing into the area around the point [0,0,0]. Essentially this view looks at it like the negative space in a painting.

      These two pictures aren't quite mirror images of each other, however with a coordinate transformation it might be possible to make them mirror images of each other. Something along the lines of mapping [0,0,0] to the point at infinity and continuously map the points surrounding the origin such that [1/d,1/d,1/d] goes to [d,d,d], basically turning space inside out around your origin point.

    7. Re:I Wish by FrangoAssado · · Score: 5, Informative

      If everything at the quantum level always worked the same way forwards as it does backwards, then entropy would be constant; the universe would be in some kind of steady state and nothing would matter because we wouldn't be here.

      That's not true. "Everything at the quantum level always working the same way forwards and backwards" is completely consistent with the second law of thermodynamics ("entropy never decreases"), and completely consistent with the observable universe (barring CP violation). All that's necessary is that the universe started with very low entropy -- like, say, the Big Bang.

      See for example this from this Arrow of Time FAQ (from cosmologist Sean Carroll):

      The observed macroscopic irreversibility is not a consequence of the fundamental laws of physics, it's a consequence of the particular configuration in which the universe finds itself. In particular, the unusual low-entropy conditions in the very early universe, near the Big Bang. Understanding the arrow of time is a matter of understanding the origin of the universe.

    8. Re:I Wish by msevior · · Score: 2, Informative

      The arrow of time is the reason why random bits of shrapnel and chemicals don't fly together and "un-detonate" to become hand grenades. In one direction of time, entropy in the universe always increases; in the other, it always decreases. The question is, why?

      The reason is very simple. Entropy is a measure of the probability of a particular outcome. The statement that "entropy increases" is simply the statement that the most probable thing to do happen is almost always the one that does happen. The "almost always" is a fantastically high probability. For example if I through a 1 cm cube of of aluminium at 26 C into a lake where the water is at a temperature of 25 C, there is something like a 10 ^-(10 ^10^23) chance that heat will from the lake into the aluminium cube and cause it's temperature to rise. If it did this the entropy of the Universe would decrease.

      What this experiment observed is profound and extremely interesting. For some reason that isn't known, the Universe prefers that certain microscopic and reversible processes occur with a greater probability if time increases.

      In other words there truly is a preferred direction to time which independent of tautology that the Universe is constantly evolving into a more probable state.

      Actually this result is was first observed in K-mesons but this new result in B-mesons has much greater significance and confirms the previous observation.

    9. Re:I Wish by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      The arrow of time refers to the fact that we perceive a difference between the past and the future: we remember the past, but not the future. That's explained adequately by noting that entropy tends to increase and the universe, for some reason, was in a low entropy state in the past.

      What they've found is that, at least for b-mesons, going forward in time is different than going backward in time, presumably in addition to the rest of the universe accumulating entropy. It's as if there was a fundamental difference between moving "north" and moving "south" in empty space.

    10. Re:I Wish by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Funny

      which direction is it pointing?

      Slightly to the left, until I see the doctor again.

      Oh, great. Now time has a liberal bias too.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    11. Re:I Wish by Artifakt · · Score: 4, Funny

      From a Doctor's perspective, it may point to the right - from THE Doctor's perspective, time points anywhere he wants (unless it goes wibbly-wobbly).

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  4. Time by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Funny

    Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

    That's all I've got to contribute. Carry on.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    1. Re:Time by sconeu · · Score: 2

      No, but if someone attacks you with a banana, you'd better have a pointed stick ready.

      Also, this "BaBar" experiment seems rather elephantine to me.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:Time by Sexy+Commando · · Score: 2

      Yes. That was a banana...No one expects the banana!

  5. Dear Slashdot: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bet you wish you had unicode now, eh?

  6. noy really the arrow of time by bcrowell · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wouldn't really describe this as confirming the arrow of time.

    The really powerful arrow of time is the thermodynamic one. The second law of thermodynamics says that entropy always increases. This thermodynamic arrow is essentially the same arrow as the psychological one, which allows us to remember the past but not the future, and all the other ones we see in nature, such as the laws of black hole thermodynamics, which say that the area of a black hole's event horizon always grows with time. This group of time-arrows, which are all essentially the same time-arrow, appear to occur because the big bang was fine-tuned to be extremely low in entropy, with its gravitational-wave degrees of freedom inactive. Nobody knows why we had a low-entropy big bang, when a random choice of initial conditions would be overwhelmingly more likely to produce a maximum-entropy one. (In particular, inflation doesn't explain it. Also, statistical mechanics doesn't explain it, because to produce the second law from statistical mechanics, you need to assume a low-entropy initial state.)

    This paper is about an arrow of time that is obscure and completely unrelated to the others. It has to do with the weak nuclear force. Unlike the others, it has essentially no effect on the world we see around us.

  7. arXiv link by Baron+Eekman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Come on people, how hard is it to include the arXiv link? Just google the title, it's usually the first hit.
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.5832

  8. What this means by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary is a bit confusing if you don't know what it's talking about. The title is even worse, since it implies the exact opposite of what it actually means. Let me try to explain it.

    First: physicists believe that the "arrow of time" isn't a fundamental property of the laws of nature. There's no fundamental difference between "forward in time" and "backward in time". The laws of physics operate identically in both directions. So why do those directions seem so different? Why do objects fall down but not up? Why can you make an egg into an omelet, but not an omelet back into an egg? Why can you remember the past, but not the future? This turns out to be a property of our local region of spacetime. More precisely, we live very close (a mere 13.5 billion years or so) away from a point of incredibly low entropy (known as "the big bang"), and that creates an entropy gradient throughout our region of spacetime. What we call "forward in time" simply means "the direction of increasing entropy", or more simply, "away from the big bang".

    A good analogy (not involving a car - sorry!) is the direction "down". It seems obvious to you that one particular direction in space is fundamentally different from all other directions. Objects fall down. They don't fall in any other direction. Yet to person on the other side of the earth, the direction they call "down" is completely different from the direction you call "down". That's because the "arrow of gravity" is not a fundamental property of the laws of nature, just a property of our local region of space. "Down" means "toward the center of the earth." In the same way, "forward in time" means "away from the big bang".

    Second: what I just said swept a few details under the rug. You see, the true symmetry is not time reversal (which would imply that simply reversing the direction of time would leave all laws of physics unchanged), but a slightly more complicated symmetry called CPT invariance. That stands for Charge, Parity, and Time. It says that if you multiply the charge of every particle by -1 (so positive charges become negative and negative become positive), flip space as if in a mirror so that your left and right sides are reversed (a "parity inversion"), and reverse the direction of time, then all the laws of physics are left unchanged.

    Scientists had previously observed a violation of CP. That is, swapping only charge and parity is not an exact symmetry of the universe. If CPT is an exact symmetry (which scientists generally believe), that implies that T is not - changing only the direction of time without also swapping charge and parity should change the laws of physics. But testing that experimentally turned out to be very hard to do. Well, they've finally done it. And the results are exactly what people expected: it appears that CPT really is an exact symmetry of the universe.

    --
    "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
    1. Re:What this means by khallow · · Score: 2

      For a start, let's assume that time is a dimension

      We don't have to assume it. We can observe the dimension of time with a clock. If we start moving the clock a bit then we change the axis which the clock is measuring. This indicates that the dimension of time exists, but isn't unique due to how we can change frame of reference.

      it could this far along and a sequence of actions moved it in this direction, reversing all the actions perfectly moves everything the other way.

      Sequence of actions isn't well defined. It is quite possible to observe different sequences of events based on where you are and how fast you are moving. One event follows another only if the second event is in the future cone of the first event (assuming events are points in space-time). This is equivalent to the first event being in the past cone of the second event.

      Of course, even if this were definitely true, you would still be faced with the dual direction problem - i.e. it looks like if time is a dimension, then it runs the same way forward as backward - as long as actions are reversible. This is just another way to say that time itself is static

      No, it's not. Something is static if it doesn't change with respect to time. Any parameter changes with respect to itself at rate 1.

      What I'm really saying here is that if time is a dimension, then the real problem is having a universe where time runs both forwards and backwards in different regions of space and that it would be possible to observe one from the other.

      This isn't at all a problem. After all, we can already observe in every unit of space, time moving forward or backwards as we see it. The trick is to have a consistent change of coordinates between the differing viewpoints. They are different frames of reference for the same space and every frame of reference has this consistent transformation to another frame of reference for the same space (so changing the direction of time is not even a unique transformation of the space, but part of a much larger set of transformations).

      Every physical property dependent on space-time coordinates can thus be transformed via change of coordinates.

      The sequence of events is not a neat linear ordering with everything happening in a strict sequence, but a sort of "partial ordering" where somethings happen after others, while others are incomparable either because they could happen before or after, depending on your frame of reference, or because they'll never affect each others' future timeline (say due to an expanding universe stretching space infinitely much between them).

      Finally, there are words you use, such as "static", "dynamic", and "interact" that require time to exist in order to make sense. So saying

      Time is the result of a universe struggling with a paradox of it being one solid indivisible thing, or a multitude of things that appear to interact.

      You can't "appear to interact" without some sort of time coordinate along which the interaction occurs.

    2. Re:What this means by MasterPatricko · · Score: 2

      A symmetry under X means the system under test is unchanged (ie the same physical laws work, your predictions are still correct) when you do X.

      A simple example is the symmetry under spatial translation -- if your experiment still behaves the same way if it's moved a meter to the left, it has "spatial translational symmetry". This symmetry isn't exactly true on the surface of the earth because of variations in the gravitational field etc., but on a small scale for lab experiments it's true, and in deep space it's certainly true. Another example is symmetry under spatial rotation -- your experiment doesn't care whether you face it north or east.

      By a very cool bit of maths called Noether's Theorem, you can show that for every symmetry that a system has, there is an associated conserved quantity. So systems with spatial translation symmetry will show conservation of momentum. Systems with time translation symmetry exhibit conservation of energy -- within that system, you can't create or destroy energy. Rotational symmetry results in conservation of angular momentum.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_(physics)

      Much of modern physics is built around identifying the symmetries that the universe (or parts of the universe) obeys, the associated conserved quantities, and what happens when those symmetries are broken -- for example the maths leading to the Higgs boson. Currently we believe the universe overall obeys C(harge) P(arity) T(ime) symmetry, that is if you change matter for antimatter, flip everything spatially (as in a mirror), and reverse the direction of time, everything would be the same. This recent experiment shows that time symmetry by itself is not obeyed -- if you only reverse the direction of time, this particular particle collision is not the same.

      --
      I'd tell a UDP joke, but you may not get it. I'd tell a TCP joke, but I'd have to keep repeating it until you got it.
    3. Re:What this means by khallow · · Score: 2

      The fact that you don't see the light of an event doesn't mean it didn't happen.

      As I note, you aren't in a situation to determine whether an event happened or not until that event passes into your past light cone. A big point to make at this time is that there are places and frames of reference where your current state and the event can be observed to happen in either order. These always exist.

      Hence, it is incorrect to state that the event has or hasn't happened yet. It can end up happening before or after your current state, depending on some observer's point of view.

  9. Re:wait what? by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Informative

    Let me explain. Most reactions are time-reversible. (Sort of) example: oxygen and hydrogen can combine to form water and release energy, but you can put energy back into the system to get hydrogen and oxygen back out again (thermodynamics states you will always lose some energy in this process, however, no matter how efficiently you conduct the H+O->water->H+O process).which indicates time is not perfectly reversible, but doesn't explain why). At the subatomic level, however, some similar (vaguely similar, anyways) reactions cannot be reversed, or don't reverse in the same way. In this case, they studied a meson that spontaneously changes from matter to antimatter and back (don't ask). If time reversibility held true for them, the probability of matter->antimatter would be the same as the probability of antimatter-> matter. It was not, by a very very very very significant margin (14 sigma, or a 1 in 10^43 chance this was seen by accident). Note this may also help to explain why matter is more prevalent than anti-matter in our universe.

    --
    "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  10. The Ugly Details by Required+Snark · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If your follow the links far enough you get here http://physics.aps.org/articles/v5/129 where they have a detailed non-mathematical description of the experiment.

    After detecting and identifying the mesons, the experimenters determined the proper time difference between the decay of the two B states by determining the energy of each meson and measuring the separation of the two meson decay vertices along the e-e+ beam axis. When time-reversed pairs were compared, the BaBar collaboration found discrepancies in the decay rates. The asymmetry, which could only come from a T transformation and not a CP violation, was significant, being fourteen standard deviations away from time invariance. Thus the long wait for an unequivocal time-reversal violation in particle physics is finally over.

    IANAP, but here is my understanding of the experiment. They knew that two different decay chains occur from some positron/electron collisions. If time is symmetric, there should be equal numbers of both chains. By making the beam energies different between the positron and electron (e-e+) beams, they were able to differentiate the decay order. If time symmetric decay occurred then there would be one spacial pattern in the results, and if time was asymmetric there would be another. The results conclusively show that for this subatomic event time runs in the direction we know as "forward". This is a big deal for subatomic physics.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  11. Entropy vs. T-symmetry by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Informative

    The arrow of time is the reason why random bits of shrapnel and chemicals don't fly together and "un-detonate" to become hand grenades.

    No, that is entropy. The reason that balls fall off tables and rarely bounce onto them (when provided with enough heat energy) is because there are many, many more states where the balls atoms vibrate incoherently and only one state (or a tiny handful) where the vibrations are organized enough to cause it to bounce back onto the table.

    With mesons you can study a particle oscillating between two states. What you find is that the P(A -> B) is not equal to the P(B -> A) where B is the anti-particle state of A and there is no entropy involved. It's all to do with something called CPT symmetry which is a result of relativity and, since CP together are violated (anti-matter is not exactly the same as matter) we expect that T (time reversal symmetry) is also violated so this is an expected result.

  12. CPLEAR by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Arrow of Time confirmed... Wheel of Time fans disappointed.

    Physicists on the CPLEAR experiment will be disappointed as well - they actually discovered this effect (called T-violation) back in the 1990's before Babar was running by looking at kaon oscillations produced in low energy proton/antiproton collisions [Phys. Lett. B 444 43 (1998)]. So Babar was certainly not the first experiment to see the "arrow of time" although it is the first to do so using B mesons.

    1. Re:CPLEAR by AchilleTalon · · Score: 5, Informative

      From TFA: "Measurements indicating time reversal was likely violated had already been made in kaons at Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois and at CERN near Geneva, but in those experiments, according to Anulli, the measurement of time reversal were not disentangled from violations of charge-parity that were also present."

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
  13. Re:wait what? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    But what does it all *mean*?

    Should I buy a Tesla, or give everything I own to the poor and go stand on the mountaintop?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  14. Re:Yes ... by Mateorabi · · Score: 2

    Actually, it's more like a big blob of wibbley wobbley, timey wimey.... stuff.

    --
    "You saved 1968." - Ms. Valerie Pringle to the crew of Apollo 8

  15. Re:Quick question then by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 2

    Yes, and not just photons. Any particle will follow the same path backward, as long as you also reverse its charge (which has no effect on a photon, since they're uncharged) and parity (which I think flips the polarization of a photon, but don't quote me on that). What CPT invariance really says is that there are two ways of describing the universe that are exactly equivalent in every way. They predict exactly the same result for any experiment you can ever do. But what one description calls "forward in time", the other one calls "backward in time".

    --
    "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
  16. Re:Quick question then by arth1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since photons do not routinely experience CP violation they also behave the same way forward and backwards in time.

    Well, photons don't experience time in either direction. Those who experience photons do, but to a photon, no time can pass because they by definition move through vacuum at c.

    It also has no antiparticle (or, you could say, it is its own antiparticle), so there's no way to reverse time even if you managed to prolong the subjective lifespan of a photon beyond instantaneous.

  17. tsop tsirF by waynemcdougall · · Score: 5, Funny

    emit fo worra diputS

    --
    Recycle PCs and build a wireless community network www.hillsborough.org.nz
  18. Re:wait what? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2

    Yes, you should.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  19. I used to be a B meson like you... by matunos · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...but then I took an arrow of time in the knee.

  20. What does this mean for the Groucho co-efficient? by Curseyoukhan · · Score: 2

    "Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana." Is it still a banana going backwards or do fruit flies now like an ananab? Also, can anyone explain what this paper means in English for an average moron like me?