Neutrinos win again

  zzzz999 06:53 19 Nov 2011

As we approach an Olympic year a new pretender to the throne of sprint champion has emerged. Neutrinos have managed to repeat their feat from two months ago and have again beating the previous champion 'Speed of light'.

For many years we had thought speed of light, Like Ed Moses, was unbeatable. Now this young pretender has done it twice: the world of athletics has been turned on its head.

That old joke will need rewritten.....'Who's there'.....'knock knock'

  morddwyd 08:06 19 Nov 2011

It's another step, but it will be a lot more significant if another team, rather than just the original researchers, can replicate it.

  Aitchbee 08:27 19 Nov 2011

What's mind boggling to me is, that, most neutrinos coming from the Sun, pass right through planet Earth,as if it wasn't there.

  interzone55 08:46 19 Nov 2011

Maybe, like the recent marathon cheat, some of the neutrinos caught the bus...

  johndrew 16:21 19 Nov 2011

It is very interesting and still may cause a bit of a rewrite of our beliefs, but as morddwyd says it would be helpful to have a level of independent corroboration. Problem being there is only one of these machines so presumably any repeat testing will have that question mark hanging over any result.

  john bunyan 17:33 19 Nov 2011

I heard on Today that a University collective group including UK physicists are hoping to replicate the test by firing neutrinos from a facility in the USA to a detector in Canada. As neutrinos are so tiny and have no charge, I wonder if, even if the results are confirmed, just how much E = MC2 will need to be modified?

  OTT_B 09:38 20 Nov 2011

"As neutrinos are so tiny and have no charge, I wonder if, even if the results are confirmed, just how much E = MC2 will need to be modified?"

I don't understand the relationship between the size of a neutrino, it's charge (or lack thereof) and E=Mc^2. Can you explain?

  T0SH 14:24 20 Nov 2011

From what I have read of this the measured difference in speed is a few millionths of a second, so would it not be more reasonable to assume that the nominal speed of light used was originally measured ever so slightly wrongly ? after all is was established quite a long time back in history

Perhaps not since that may lessen the chances of increased research funding to investigate this more fully

Cheers HC

  john bunyan 17:57 20 Nov 2011

OTT_B Not being a person trained in quantum physics, no! I hoped someone with such knowledge would comment. It is difficult to grasp the implications , but it is difficult to believe that so much work has seemed to confirm Einstein was correct. Unlike the suggestion that a "Higgs Boson" particle ought to exist to explain anomalies re mass, no one seems to have suggested a similar anomaly in the speed of light issue. Surely observations of the arrival of neutrinos and light from a supernova would have shown this phenomenon? Suggestions based on other dimansions being involved are also difficult to grasp!!

  Aitchbee 19:29 20 Nov 2011

If an athlete is competin' in the London Olympics called Alb. Ertstein...look out!

  Aitchbee 19:45 20 Nov 2011

Albert's brain was cut into a thousand little pieces, (when he was dead), and put into jar's for mementos....just wait...'till he come's back in the reprove his Theory of Special Relativity. "Vere.. is my brain, got dammit...I left it here a century ago?"

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Huawei MateBook X Pro review

How Pentagram and other design agencies aim to double the number of creative female leaders

How to speed up a slow Mac

Comment résoudre des problèmes d’impressions ?