Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
|
 Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 18,224
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
 Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN  [Re: imachavel]
#15141697 - 09/27/11 02:20 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
dude no one knows how fast light goes? am i wrong?
Yes, you are wrong.
The speed of light can and has been measured by many methods, the simplest of which is by bouncing it off a distant mirror a known distance away and measuring the time it takes for the round trip.
This is fairly elementary physics. In fact, the first accurate measurement was made around the mid 1800's using a MECHANICAL setup, long before electronics.
It was done by quickly spinning a prism, then shining a bright flame-based lamp into the prism such that the beam of light would "scan" across a mirror on a distant mountain. Then the returning light passes back through the prism and is shined on a protractor graduated in degrees so the angle between the outbound and inbound beams can be measured. This is the angle through which the prism rotated in the time it took the light to make the round trip.
With knowledge of the distance to the mirror, the speed of the rotating prism, and the angle at which the returning light emerges from the prism, all it takes is a bit of grade-school math to calculate the speed. The measurements made in the 1850's were accurate to better than 1% of the modern value!
This is a matter of common history, and it's not hard to understand. I don't get why you refuse to believe it.
--------------------
Believe those who are seeking Truth. Doubt those who find it.
|
Brainstem
_@_y
 
Registered: 07/31/10
Posts: 1,969
Loc: In my shell 
|
 Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Diploid]
#15141733 - 09/27/11 02:29 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Nothing is supposed to be able to exceed the speed of light (300,000,000 meters per second), but are there any conditions where light is slowed ?
|
DieCommie
El Guapo
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 25,374
Loc: Street of Dreams
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Brainstem]
#15141745 - 09/27/11 02:33 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brainstem said:
Nothing is supposed to be able to exceed the speed of light (300,000,000 meters per second), but are there any conditions where light is slowed ?
There are conditions where light is effectively slowed because it picks up a phase shift upon interacting with a charge.
I posted this a while back in philosophy forum,
Quote:
And also, yes - c is a constant and humans cant change that. The crude metaphor is that light in a medium has to interact with the occasional particle and that interaction takes time, like a car stopping at stop lights. But inbetween the interactions the light moves at c. The slightly more correct description is that when light interacts with a particle it picks up a phase shift, and these successive phase shifts net to an observed slowing of the light. What you do is add terms to maxwell's equations that account for the electric and magnetic effects of the material. These are very coarse grained fields that average over the atomic interactions and turn the periodic phase shift into a continual one.
|
Brainstem
_@_y
Registered: 07/31/10
Posts: 1,969
Loc: In my shell
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: DieCommie]
#15141752 - 09/27/11 02:36 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks Diecommie, clear and concise.
|
 imachavel
Stranger
Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 8,718
Loc: Florida - not listed
Last seen: 52 seconds
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Brainstem]
#15141987 - 09/27/11 03:30 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brainstem said:
Nothing is supposed to be able to exceed the speed of light (300,000,000 meters per second), but are there any conditions where light is slowed ?
do you really think there are any tools right now that can determine accuracy to a point of 300,000,000 metres per second? that is quite a claim. this is the best answer I have gotten so far:
http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/waves_particles/lightspeed_evidence.html
apparently this has been measured within our solar system, a MUCH more accurate measurement as quite a few miles are needed to measure something and get such an accurate precise answer. I don't think with some mountains and a mirror that gallileo could bounce some beams of light and figure out that light takes 0.000005 of a second to travel one mile. sorry, not precise enough. excuse me for being skeptical. but some measure of accuracy is needed another then someone counting "1... 2... 3 one thousand... 4"
if we are going to battle with accurate measurements, how about I put a mirror on the back of my bicycle, ride down the fucking street, and you can bounce some light off of the back of the mirror and the further it travels start counting how long it takes to see the reflection.
what is the estimate of how long it takes light to travel from the sun to earth? 9 minutes? 4 minutes? this sounds slow but let's be realistic the sun is in reality about a few thousand if not hundred thousand times bigger then earth, and it's like hundreds of millions miles away
--------------------
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 18,224
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
 Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: imachavel] 5
#15142850 - 09/27/11 06:38 PM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
do you really think there are any tools right now that can determine accuracy to a point of 300,000,000 metres per second?
Yes. When I was in high-school 30 years ago, we had a bench with an oscilloscope that could make that measurement.
I have a run-of-the-mill oscilloscope in my closet right now that can make that measurement. Its time base is 3 GHz so it could actually measure the time it takes light to travel just 1 millimeter! Now imagine what the world's top particle physics lab can measure.
We ARE in the 21st century, you know. My game console performs 100 calculations in the time it takes light to travel 1 meter.
I don't think with some mountains and a mirror that gallileo could bounce some beams of light and figure out that light takes 0.000005 of a second to travel one mile. sorry, not precise enough.
Sorry, you are completely clueless.
Here are some hard numbers showing the plausibility of what I said:
The known speed of light measured with modern instruments is around 300,000,000 meters per second.
That means that it takes light 1/300,000,000th of a second to travel 1 meter.
If the distant mirror on the mountain in the experiment I mentioned is 30,000 meters away (19 miles), then the round trip is double that so 60,000 meters round trip. That means it takes 60,000/300,000,000th of a second to travel the 60 kilometer round trip.
That reduces to 0.2 milliseconds for the round trip. That's a long time to a rapidly rotating prism (and an eternity to even a $100 second-hand oscilloscope).
Lemme repeat that because I don't think you really have a handle on the magnitudes we're talking about: It takes light 0.2 milliseconds to travel the 60 kilometer (38 mile) round trip to the mountain mirror and back. Do you know what a millisecond is? And are you aware that any TV repair man has instruments on his bench that can measure down to NANOSECONDS?
So with that behind us, now spin the prism at 10,000 RPM. That's 167 revolutions per second. So in the 0.2 milliseconds it takes light to make the round trip, the prism will have rotated by 12 degrees!
The scientist who first made this measurement in ~1850 knew the RPM of his prism, and so figuring the time it took to spin 12 degrees required 3rd grade math. That time was how long it took the light to make the round trip and gave him its speed to better than 1% accuracy.
|
cortex
[ H ] ψ = [ E ] ψ
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 15,158
Loc: Gedankenexperiment
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Diploid] 3
#15145118 - 09/28/11 02:35 AM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
pwnd
--------------------
The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift for which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research -- EUGENE P WIGNER
The universe is not only queerer than we suppose; it is queerer than we can suppose -- J.B.S. HALDANE
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 18,224
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: HarveyWalbanger]
#15212947 - 10/12/11 11:02 AM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Just days after Albert Einstein's theory that nothing moves faster than light was called into question by a startling neutrino experiment, the long-dead physicist might have come to his own rescue.
Einstein's general theory of relativity contends that a slight difference in the force of gravity at two different places causes clocks in those places to tick at different rates. Carlo Contaldi, a theoretical physicist at Imperial College London, argues that when physicists recently measured neutrinos traveling at 1.000025 times light-speed between Switzerland and Italy, they didn't fully correct for this effect, and that failing to do so could have caused their shocking results.
"I think there are significant questions as to whether or not their clocks were synchronized correctly," Contaldi told Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site to LiveScience. His paper, posted online to the physics arXiv preprint site on Sept. 30, is one of the first to challenge the neutrino experiment's process.
In the OPERA experiment (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus), physicists working at the Gran Sasso National Laboratory in Italy — a lab buried almost a mile underground — timed the arrival of muon neutrinos coming from CERN, a physics facility near Geneva, Switzerland, 451 miles (731 kilometers) away. To the astonishment of the entire world, the neutrinos clocked in 60 nanoseconds sooner than a light beam traveling the same distance would have done.
This was remarkable because neutrinos have mass (although very little), and, as Einstein taught the world, massive objects would seem to need infinite energy to travel at light speed, let alone faster. If Einstein was wrong, most modern physics theories topple with him.
But Contaldi contends that OPERA's clocks, rather than its neutrinos, may have been out of whack. Gran Sasso and CERN are at different distances from the center of the Earth, so the force of gravity varies slightly between the two labs. In an effect known as "gravitational time dilation," gravity causes time to drag, just as it stretches space. The different gravitational strengths at the two labs therefore mean that clocks at CERN run slightly slower than clocks at Gran Sasso. And on the lightning-fast timescales involved in the OPERA experiment, a small difference in the clock speed is significant enough to matter.
Pasquale Migliozzi, a physicist on the OPERA experiment who acts as the group's spokesperson, told Life's Little Mysteries and Contaldi that the OPERA team matched up their clocks in Gran Sasso and Geneva by synchronizing them with a third clock — that of a GPS satellite. In their setup, the neutrino departure and arrival times were both measured by the same GPS satellite, and the times were logged on GPS receivers in the two labs. The team brought in METAS, a Swiss metrology institute, to calibrate the receivers at the two locations, and Migliozzi said that the time measurements using this method should have been accurate to within 2 nanoseconds.
But Contaldi says that GPS synchronization is not nearly that accurate, because GPS satellite signals are themselves subject to gravitational time dilation. GPS receivers make corrections to account for this, but nonetheless the clock signals are only guaranteed to be correct on the order of 100 nanoseconds. Therefore, Contaldi argues, they can't be used to time events that happen faster than that.
"From what I've seen, my estimate is that there are tens of nanoseconds of uncertainty in GPS synchronization, and from what I can tell, [the OPERA scientists] assume [their clocks] were perfectly synchronized," Contaldi said. If he is right, then an error range of tens of nanoseconds would greatly reduce the significance of a measurement in which neutrinos beat light by tens of nanoseconds.
Contaldi concedes that the OPERA team may have made more of an effort to synchronize its clocks than it elucidated in the first draft of the paper. But if so, he says, it is crucial that those physicists explain it. "I hope they are preparing a more in depth discussion of how they took their clocks to be synchronized."
Migliozzi didn't comment on Contaldi's further inquiries, but the back-and-forth is likely to continue. The OPERA scientists have not purposely withheld information about their experiment and have welcomed criticism from the outset. Even they admit that the details of their experimental setup are more likely to be flawed than are the fundamental laws of physics.
LiveScience
--------------------
Believe those who are seeking Truth. Doubt those who find it.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 18,224
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Diploid] 1
#15212952 - 10/12/11 11:04 AM (1 year, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Log in to view attachment
Here is the Contaldi paper.
--------------------
Believe those who are seeking Truth. Doubt those who find it.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 24,902
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: HarveyWalbanger] 1
#15388037 - 11/18/11 12:36 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
|
 Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,394
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 9 days
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: luvdemshrooms] 1
#15388151 - 11/18/11 01:01 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
> 2nd test affirms faster-than-light particles
A bit misleading. They simply ruled out one of many possible sources of error. They did not duplicate the results using a completely different methodology.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 2,945
Last seen: 43 minutes, 1 second
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Seuss]
#15388283 - 11/18/11 01:30 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
> 2nd test affirms faster-than-light particles
A bit misleading. They simply ruled out one of many possible sources of error. They did not duplicate the results using a completely different methodology.
Agreed. They used the same analysis and the same experimental setup, so I would say this would be the expected result.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 24,902
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Seuss]
#15388372 - 11/18/11 01:50 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
> 2nd test affirms faster-than-light particles
A bit misleading. They simply ruled out one of many possible sources of error. They did not duplicate the results using a completely different methodology.
I'll buy that. I'll freely admit much of that stuff is beyond me, which is why I rarely take part in discussions of this nature.
I just stumbled across the article, recalled this thread and posted here for those who enjoy discussing these things.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
|
SomeGuy
I feel better now :)
Registered: 04/18/10
Posts: 7,496
Loc: 
Last seen: 2 months, 9 hours
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#15388430 - 11/18/11 02:02 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I know I'm chimming in really late, but Einstien was aware of something moving faster than the speed of light. He called it,"spooky action" and made a far fetched hypothosis to try to explain it. Scientists are aware that "spooky action" happens faster than the speed of light, only now they have observed something that does  makes sense to me
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,394
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 9 days
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: SomeGuy]
#15388451 - 11/18/11 02:07 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
> He called it,"spooky action"
"Spooky Action" is better known as quantum entanglement. Quantum entanglement does not allow for information to be transferred faster than the speed of light, thus relativity still holds. There is also something known as group velocity which travels faster than the speed of light, but again, it cannot carry information faster than the speed of light, thus again, relativity still holds.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 18,224
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: luvdemshrooms] 1
#15388461 - 11/18/11 02:10 PM (1 year, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Two-way light speed measurements are relatively easy because you need just one accurate clock. But one-way measurements are enormously more complicated because you now start with two accurate clocks side-by-side so they can be exactly synchronized, then one of them has to move in the Earth's rotating frame to the other end of the experiment. The problem is then unpredictable time dilation. You can't just set up two atomic clocks, then carry one to the destination lab because it will be desynchronized by the movement. You can never know exactly how desynchronized they get because there are too many variable to account for.
The reason is that the amount of desynchronization is a function of whether the traveling clock flew in an airplane or rode in a car or train, thus farther or closer to the time-dilating gravity of the Earth. If in an airplane, then at what altitude as that has a variable effect. At what speed as that also has an effect. Did it take a direct great-circle route or a circuitous route along established aviation airways as that changes the synchronization too.
If the traveling clock went by car or train, how fast did it go? Did it travel over the surface of the Earth or through any tunnels as the gravity of half a mountain above the tunnel has a variable effect on synchronization. Did it stop overnight somewhere while the physicists slept as that contributes to the desynchronization.
There are a zillion other little nit-picks that all contribute a practically incalculable effect to the total clock error when it finally arrives at the destination. That's the big problem with these types of experiments and why they're almost impossible to set up with the required timing accuracy.
If this experiment is done with different equipment (different routes and modes of travel for the clock), it will result in a different speed measurement which could show superluminal speeds greater than CERN's or ordinary speeds below expectations, or anything in-between depending on how all the timing errors add up in the end.
To prove this once and for all, the experiment would have to be done in space with the traveling clock far enough away from the confounding effects of the Earth's gravity or with a short-enough baseline that there is a reasonable possibility to account for most of the timing errors. That has not happened.
However, I sure would love to be proven wrong. 
--------------------
Believe those who are seeking Truth. Doubt those who find it.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 24,902
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Diploid]
#15848068 - 02/22/12 05:50 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Not so fast: Loose wire led to stunning, faster-than-light particle finding
Published February 22, 2012
FoxNews.com
A loose connection between a timer and a computer led some of the world’s smartest particle physicists to conclude that certain tiny particles called neutrinos moved faster than the speed of light -- a declaration that shocked the science world and would have called into questions Einstein’s theories.
Citing sources familiar with the experiment, Science magazine’s website reported Wednesday that the 60-nanoseconds discrepancy that led to the startling speed conclusion came from a bad connection in a fiber optic cable connecting a GPS receiver (used to correct the timing of the neutrinos' flight) and a computer.
After tightening the connection and then remeasuring the time it takes data to travel the length of the cable, researchers found that the data arrive 60 nanoseconds earlier than assumed, the website said. (More data will be needed to confirm this hypothesis, the site cautioned.)
Einstein theorized that the speed of light in a vacuum -- approximately 186,280 miles per second, or about 700 million miles per hour -- is an absolute speed limit, and used the value in his famous formula, E = mc2.
Rewriting the theories based on this speed limit would have made an array of science fiction ideas more plausible -- even time travel.
The theory that some tiny bits of matter were whizzing along faster than Einstein thought possible was announced in Sept. 2011, when physicists with the CERN lab in Switzerland said they observed neutrinos completing a 454-mile racecourse faster than a beam of light would.
CERN representatives did not immediately respond to FoxNews.com requests to confirm the faulty wiring diagnosis.
When announcing their follow-up finding in November, scientists at the Italian Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN) said that their tests were intended to exclude one potential effect that may have affected the original measurement.
"A measurement so delicate and carrying a profound implication on physics requires an extraordinary level of scrutiny," said Fernando Ferroni, president of the INFN.
Apparently, yet more scrutiny was required.
"It's very hard to find an error by reading a paper," particle physicist Rob Roser of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Batavia, Ill., said Friday at an annual science meeting.
"What you need is for someone else to make the measurement. We'll see what happens."
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
|
Luddite
cognitive dissident
Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,454
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#15848675 - 02/22/12 07:38 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Maybe the neutrinos were moving in the opposite direction of the earth relative to the aether. Since light would be isotropic in the aether frame of reference, this would make it appear that the neutrinos are going faster than the speed of light to observers on earth. The reason some experiments appear to show the speed of light is constant is because of the effect of the Lorentz transformations on the instruments.
Also, why is the speed of light between Venus and Earth NOT constant?
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
|
Chespirito
Stranger
Registered: 02/13/09
Posts: 3,258
|
Re: Particles recorded moving faster than light - CERN [Re: Luddite]
#15849335 - 02/22/12 09:40 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
oh you do go on 
| |
|
|
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Lana, trendal, Diploid, automan, johnm214
2,436 topic views. 0 members, 5 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic ]
| | |
|
|
|
Images only 
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
