Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Speed Of Light May Be Challenged?


davehsug

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Hanley, Stoke-on-trent
  • Location: Hanley, Stoke-on-trent

Hi all seen this fascinating piece

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

I've always said that the only reason we said that nothing could travel faster than light, was because we didn't know about. I never expected that I might be proved right in my lifetime, but just maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always suspected that that is not the whole story - it has been suggested for some time that some particles could travel faster than light - interesting - it has also been suggested that the speed of light was variable at least in the early stages of the big bang when it is thought in some quarters that the speed of light was faster than what it is now - Oh how little we know - we might get warp factor 7 yet :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lower Brynamman, nr Ammanford, 160-170m a.s.l.
  • Location: Lower Brynamman, nr Ammanford, 160-170m a.s.l.
Posted · Hidden by Crepuscular Ray, September 22, 2011 - No reason given
Hidden by Crepuscular Ray, September 22, 2011 - No reason given

Oh hell, there goes the (interplanetary) neighbourhood.

Link to comment
Posted
  • Location: Sunderland
  • Weather Preferences: Hot Summer, Snowy winter and thunderstorms all year round!
  • Location: Sunderland

There is already a thread on this!!!!.....I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL
  • Weather Preferences: January 1987 / July 2006
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL

There is already a thread on this!!!!.....I

To be fair the thread is on the LHC and not this specific discovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
  • Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

Neutrinos are the same particles which are detected in a burst just before a supernova becomes visible. They're supposed to be emitted from the collapsed star before the the light itself is - but could they be actually travelling marginally faster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark

I confess having learned relativity in robot fashion a long time ago, but I also confess I never believed a word of it. The whole business is messy.

First the Michaelson Morley experiment, and the speed of light is constant on Earth. Then, it is only constant in a vacuum. There was no explained connection between the speed of light being constant, and colour in refracted rays. Relativity and Quantum Theory cannot agree on gravity. Now we have this.

It was enough for me when I was fed that tripe about thought experiments, and clocks moving at close to the speed of light. I mean, who but a fool can think that time and the position of a clock's hands are the same thing?

Edited by Alan Robinson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Altitude: 189 m, Density Altitude: 6 m
  • Weather Preferences: Tropical Cyclone, Blizzard, Thunderstorm, Freezing Cold Day and Heat Wave.
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Altitude: 189 m, Density Altitude: 6 m

Does this discovery affect the quantum mechanics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Altitude: 189 m, Density Altitude: 6 m
  • Weather Preferences: Tropical Cyclone, Blizzard, Thunderstorm, Freezing Cold Day and Heat Wave.
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Altitude: 189 m, Density Altitude: 6 m

And the paper:

Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam:

http://static.arxiv....f/1109.4897.pdf

Edited by Konstantinos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sunderland
  • Weather Preferences: Hot Summer, Snowy winter and thunderstorms all year round!
  • Location: Sunderland

just reposting what I posted in the LHC thread yesterday

Although not actually part of the LHC experiments, the following link describes an interesting experiment at CERN, the results of which suggest the detection of Neutrinos (near-massless particles) traveling at superluminal (faster-than-light) speeds..

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-15017484

Whilst newsworthy, it should be added that the BBC article is factually innacurate in that it states that superluminal velocities violate the theories of relativity as written by Einstein...This is incorrect because superluminal velocities do not violate special relativity as special relativity theories that the speed of light (186,000 miles per second) is not constant in all places....Worth baring in mind that Physicists have long theorised the existance of sub-atomic particles called Tachyons, which according to physical law can only travel at superluminal speeds, if they do indeed exist....Fascinating stuff though!

I've always suspected that that is not the whole story - it has been suggested for some time that some particles could travel faster than light - interesting - it has also been suggested that the speed of light was variable at least in the early stages of the big bang when it is thought in some quarters that the speed of light was faster than what it is now - Oh how little we know - we might get warp factor 7 yet :)

also worth mentioning that there are numerous physicists who believe the big bang theory is old hat, the 'in' theory is M-theory, which after months researching seems more plausible to me

Edited by ajpoolshark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Chevening Kent
  • Location: Chevening Kent

I would ask is if the results verify could it still leave Einsteins theory in tact or would it have to lead to a complete rewrite of the book? We know that many elements in quantum physics defy standard physics but does not necassarily mean our current understanding is wrong does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark

I would ask is if the results verify could it still leave Einsteins theory in tact or would it have to lead to a complete rewrite of the book? We know that many elements in quantum physics defy standard physics but does not necassarily mean our current understanding is wrong does it?

At the risk of repeating myself, my view is that much modern physics is not physics at all, but metaphysics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

As always, with a one-off set of results, I will remain sceptical...for the time-being at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Orleton, 6 miles south of Ludlow
  • Location: Orleton, 6 miles south of Ludlow

As always, with a one-off set of results, I will remain sceptical...for the time-being at least.

I agree, the results have to be validated by another group before any conclusions can/could be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

I would ask is if the results verify could it still leave Einsteins theory in tact or would it have to lead to a complete rewrite of the book? We know that many elements in quantum physics defy standard physics but does not necassarily mean our current understanding is wrong does it?

When I was a kid Jupiter had 12 moons Saturn 5 etc, these were all 'facts'. The article suggests there will be a lot more investigation required but interesting times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I confess having learned relativity in robot fashion a long time ago, but I also confess I never believed a word of it. The whole business is messy.

First the Michaelson Morley experiment, and the speed of light is constant on Earth. Then, it is only constant in a vacuum. There was no explained connection between the speed of light being constant, and colour in refracted rays. Relativity and Quantum Theory cannot agree on gravity. Now we have this.

It was enough for me when I was fed that tripe about thought experiments, and clocks moving at close to the speed of light. I mean, who brelating to itut a fool can think that time and the position of a clock's hands are the same thing?

I expect I am a fool - I lapped up the explanation of relativity when it was explained in layman's terms, though I don't have a snowball's chance in hell of understanding the maths behind it, so I have to rely on explanations by other people. The same goes for quantum mechanics but as I understand it nobody fully understands this either despite there being many applications in modern life. A bit like electricity - we know what it does and we know the laws but can anybody really explain what it is?

Edited by mike Meehan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

Not too suprising, there are theoretical ways around the speed of light issue.

http://news.discovery.com/space/warp-drive-spaceship-engine.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Hanley, Stoke-on-trent
  • Location: Hanley, Stoke-on-trent

There is already a thread on this!!!!.....I

Sorry AJ. I just thought this was a bit bigger than that? Anyhoo, feel free to move the posts, I don't mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sunderland
  • Weather Preferences: Hot Summer, Snowy winter and thunderstorms all year round!
  • Location: Sunderland

Sorry AJ. I just thought this was a bit bigger than that? Anyhoo, feel free to move the posts, I don't mind.

Hi Dave...actually at the time I posted that, for some odd reason, it cut off the rest of my post, so it seemed a bit abrupt...sorry about that! I went on to post quite a long piece about m-theory and the hypothesized 'Alcubierre' drive but 'Summer Blizzard' has already posted about it so I won't repeat the post word for word..For anyone interested on FTL travel, I recommend getting hold of a copy of the book 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku...Hard-core astrophysics in layman's english!.....there's also a very good wiki entry which is factually very accurate at http://en.wikipedia....lcubierre_drive ......Anyhoos, good thread Dave, my favourite topic! good.gif

Edited by ajpoolshark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Heswall, Wirral
  • Weather Preferences: Summer: warm, humid, thundery. Winter: mild, stormy, some snow.
  • Location: Heswall, Wirral

Michio Kaku is a pretty awesome read.

Marcus Chown isn't bad either if you're willing to read something more technical.

Even Mr Kaku will concede these are just theories though (presented in his books)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Stanwell(south side of Heathrow Ap)
  • Weather Preferences: Thunderstorms, squally fronts, snow, frost, very mild if no snow or frost
  • Location: Stanwell(south side of Heathrow Ap)

This is a new discovery so i would want to wait a while for more experiments on this. but all very exciting, i think as we have new science exploring technology we can find out new things that once were thought not possible, why not? we find out one new theory or make a scientific breakthrough and this can lead to another

Edited by ElectricSnowStorm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark
  • Location: Taasinge, Denmark

A bit like electricity - we know what it does and we know the laws but can anybody really explain what it is?

Er, not Wikipedia at least. For them in is just a fundamental property, meaning that nobody knows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Stanwell(south side of Heathrow Ap)
  • Weather Preferences: Thunderstorms, squally fronts, snow, frost, very mild if no snow or frost
  • Location: Stanwell(south side of Heathrow Ap)

Am i right in thinking that futuristic internet connections would use this faster then light thing? and be the fastest ever?

Edited by ElectricSnowStorm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Ashford, Kent
  • Weather Preferences: Anything
  • Location: Ashford, Kent

Am i right in thinking that futuristic internet connections would use this faster then light thing? and be the fastest ever?

Interesting! Although I suspect that considering the huge apparatus needed to produce and detect neutrinos our wireless routers would need to be substantially larger. Say the size of a medium sized office block! However, it raises the prospect of receiving an email slightly before it was sent. which boggles the mind slightly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Eastbourne, East Sussex (work in Mid Sussex)
  • Location: Eastbourne, East Sussex (work in Mid Sussex)

However, it raises the prospect of receiving an email slightly before it was sent. which boggles the mind slightly...

Does it mean I'll get my salary paid before I work the full month then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...