A disturbance in the force – CERN finds faster than light particles?

The science is settled…

Amazing!!!!
Thanks for exciting info.

Sorry, the science on this subject has been completely settled for a long time. Their observations are impossible and (various snarky remarks about the CERN team.)
/sarc_off
Seriously though, this would be pretty amazing if true. I think they’ll need some pretty vigorous confirmations, though.

”It doesn’t take 100 scientists to prove me wrong, it takes a single fact.” -Albert Einstein
There is the fact…

Sulu, Warp 5.

Why not just model it?

String theorists must be going ga-ga. From what I recall they have been predicting this for quite a while based on the inconnectivity of objects reacting to each other instantaneously, ie faster than light speed. I think… it’s been a while since I read about it and it took some serious work to wrap my head around a lot the stuff.

The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” but “That’s funny…”
— Isaac Asimov

To me, these physicists are acting like real scientists should — publishing their measurements openly and with a call to others in the scientific community to try to replicate their findings (or disprove them).
Too bad so-called climate scientists haven’t been as forthcoming and open (science is settled).

According to Wikipedia this isn’t the first time neutrinos have been observed travelling faster than light but earlier events were dismissed, not “robust” enough I suppose.

Maybe it’s not a question of speed but a question of distance. There are 730 km between the CERN and Gran Sasso and it seems that the neutrinos beam has exceeded the speed of light by only 20 meters. This could be explained by a slight uplift of the earth crust du to a tide effect. The Moon has a well known and visible effect on ocean tides and a very slight but real effect on the earth crust. They had some problems with that at CERN, a few years ago, because this tide effect made it difficult to adjust their beams of particles in their Large Hadron Collider. If the Moon was above Switzerland or Italy when they measured the speed of their neutrinos beams, the culprit may be easy to fix.

If true, this is a real game changing moment in history. It also, of course means that if one of the fundmental laws we accept as true is in fact not, that climate scientists shrill cries of “the science is settled” will look nothing short of the rantings of madmen.

Luboš Motl had written about this some days ago:
http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/09/italian-out-of-tune-superluminal.html
Ecotretas

I am highly, highly doubtful. There have been lots and lots of measurements of neutrino speed that disagree with this one.
One of the more famous is the supernova back in 1987 (I think) – the light and neutrinos showed up at the same time. Considering its distance, even the tiny difference that they think they’ve found here would have come out to be huge. We would have seen a neutrino surge long before the light showed up.
I think they claimed the neutrinos gained 60 billionths of a second in 2.4 milliseconds. If the supernova were merely 1 light year away, the neutrinos would have arrived about 788 seconds before the light. The supernova was 168,000 light years away, and so the neutrinos would have arrived about four years ahead of the light. We would have seen a very strong neutrino source in the sky suddenly appear 4 years before the supernova and then slowly taper away.
That’s not what we saw, though. We saw the neutrinos taper away at the same rate as the light from the supernova.
However, I am looking forward greatly to find out why the neutrinos are getting there first! This could be one of those “Huh, that’s weird” moments that results in a giant breakthrough!

Someone call Joao Magueijo. However, quantum tunnelling hyothetically is the instantaneous (ininite speed?) travel of subatomic particals though I am not sure it has been proven to acceptable levels. So, simply FTL is somewhat slow by comparison. We were taught that neutrinos had no mass but only a “spin”. But this was long ago and I have read that recently it is thought that they do have some mass. Very interesting stuff. How does this all fit in with present day “settled science” in the world of physics?

Further to Dave G’s comment.
Gran Sasso is at a higher altitude than CERN. Time is slower near mass, so time at CERN flows more slowly than at Gran Sasso because CERN is closer to the centre of the earth, while still at the surface of the earth. If there is an accurate atomic clock at CERN and another at San Grasso, and they compare them every day, they will find that the CERN clock gradually loses time relative to the San Grasso clock.
Did the researches allow for time going more slowly at CERN?

“Nothing is supposed to move faster than light, at least according to Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity”
This is simply not true. The speed of light in vacuum is a mathematical limit. Although particles moving faster than light have never been observed, the existence of such particles is not in violation of Einstein’s special relativity.
Such hypothetic particles have been dubbed tachyons, and extensive mathematical research has been already been made in the field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon
What special relativity does say, though, is that you can’t accelerate particles from below speed of light to above speed of light.

I’m guessing some sort of undiscovered “bow wave” energy effect where earlier arriving and unassociated neutrinos are being raised to a higher state of energy, giving the appearance of association and early arrival. At the quantum level, strange connections happen in the interaction between particles and fields.

I’ve always had a problem with the light speed limit. It is counterintuitive. I have convinced myself I might be wrong but it has always nagged at me. Einstein was a wiz at intuitive science but I think he swallowed the math Kool-Aide. Not everything can be quantified in my opinion. He was a firm believer in mathematics even when the maths made no intuitive sence.
I am sad to read the Cern quote ““We wanted to find a mistake – trivial mistakes, more complicated mistakes, or nasty effects – and we didn’t,”. That’s just confirmation bias, you have to break through that if you are going to discover anything.

huh? this is a science blog, right? so all of you know that relativity does not limit objects to below light speed – and, in fact, nature offers lots of stuff we model as having a physical existence (e.g. photons) that move at light speed. What the equations say is that the force needed to accelerate an object to c approaches infinity as v approaches c . So we can’t accelerate our space ship to c, have no idea how forces apply at c+, but have no problems fitting an object at c or c+ into the models.

I always like to think Einstein’s theory shows where Trenberth’s missing heat may be hiding.

If borne out, what are some possible practical applications of faster than light particles?

So now Einstein joins Spencer and Christy as a scientist whose work is full of errors requiring corrections.

They shouldn’t put up their observations. The only reason people want to look at it is to find something wrong. Oh wait!

Q: What is their mass estimate?

Sorry, but I’m left wondering here – As I never got any indication of what type of neutrino mentioned. As we know neutrinos can osculate between tau neutrinos, muon neutrinos and electron neutrinos. We know from evidence that some of the muon neutrinos had morphed into electron neutrinos. So I’m wondering exactly which neutrino CERN was referring to?

Causality has already been broken at Skeptical Science. That’s why Julia Gillard is in a hurry with the Carbon Tax.

Noted in passing is the fact that ROOT has had and probably still has bugs. They got 50K of them so far. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/22/cern_coverity/ I vote for buggy software over tachyons.

In Denmark we had a weather prophet named Arne Gabs that could predict earthquakes and plane crashes – and that Jupiter will be the new sun and its moons, its new planets
– Read more from an old school paper -translated from Danish
The material Universe
A part-teori – Arne Gabs
Arne Gabs has spent many years of his life to devise this part-teori: The material universe. But it has managed to challenge both Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. It is quite an achievement!!
Introduction
Paradise Earth is a paradise. So you must behave as we do in Paradise: Enjoy your next all the time. Enjoy your life, it’s so short. You have only one life and it is now. If you are thinking about new, good thoughts, you are vibrant and innovative. Your good thoughts are worthless if you can not translate them into action. If you’re not using your brain, you’re already dead.
Creating
The debate about creation is interesting. Many ideas are thoughtful and many tales written and told about creation. The Bible did an omnipotent God is at 6 days and then rested the seventh day. It’s a pretty old idea that expresses everything you knew at the time. Therefore, the proper time. However, there were cultures, such as the Babylonian, who believed to know more. Today we know that nothing comes from nothing. Thus, you also know that everything that exists, has been there forever, because everything that exists consists of something. The universe is thus materially.
Looking for example at the rings around Jupiter, we can see that constantly creating new, small moons. As the moons gravity is negligible, it grows very slowly, but they are growing, however the whole time. Time is classified as having enough of, so creation are seeing again today. It has always been and will continue forever. The material universe covers everything consists of matter and a spiritual part does not exist. Such a universe is simpler and thus easier to understand. As humans, we experience this universe of the senses we have, so it is important to look at how these senses work, and what is needed in order to operate. If you look at yourself in a mirror, most of you during your eye level as in other animals, but what separates you from other animals is your brain. Most of it has enough to do to keep yourself alive, and a very small part of the brain are you as a person: your I, your personality, your opinions. One of your most important sensory apparatus are your eyes that have the property that when they detect a very rapid particle, you perceive it as light. It is surprising, the particle emits no light – it moves only. The situation is even so that the particles you are least able to detect are those that run straight into your eyes. They can even make your eyes blind. The same goes for those who are moving away from you. The interesting thing is, you detect the particle velocity. You perceive different speeds at which different colors. Each speed its color! Your sense of hearing detects vibrations in the air layer. It is perceived as noise. Your ears perceive then waves as your eyes perceive particles.
The new universe
Our universe is material, everything that exists consists of something. In this universe is the attribute of all the mass that is appealing to all other mass. The universe is filled with particles with all possible speed. Some of these particles have an extremely penetrating ability. Earth and other celestial bodies use this mass to slow these particles. The larger and denser mass, the greater the deceleration, which causes the particles have a higher speed when they enter the mass, than when they come out the other side. This difference is seen as an attraction, but it’s the opposite: a pressure from outside. When it comes to Earth, it is such that some particles did not come through, but becomes part of the Earth. Thereby increasing the Earth and thus are attracting larger and larger. Earth has never grown so fast as now – The bigger it gets, the faster it becomes even larger. The particles have a very high kinetic energy, and with the full braking, this energy into heat – the earth is getting warmer! Now we know something new, larger attracting a lot have, the faster it becomes larger. The bigger it gets, the more gravity particles captures it. The more particles it captures, the hotter it becomes. Thus, we know how hot all celestial bodies are. We also know that the less weight a body have, the colder it is. The smaller an object is, the slower is its growth.
Light Today, scientific view of the light that the light can be seen both as particles and waves. It is a wrong perception. The light emitted by the particle flow, because when these particles hit a media that can put the media in a wave mode. If we sit at a quiet lake, its surface nicely polished. If you take a stone and throws it into the water, formed a wave trains. It is not the stone (light particles) which waves, but the water. If there was no water, there were no waves. When a particles of light leaving the Sun headed for Earth in the void, it is a particle flow without waves, for there is no medium that can create waves. When our little particles of light hits the first little atom of our atmosphere consists of taking over this atomic particles of light energy and continues as a new particles of light, but since it is slightly larger than light particles, it will continue with the same energy that it received, but with a less speed. This new particles of light delivers its energy to one that is bigger and slower. Now it has gradually slowed down so much that our eye detects it as blue. For remember – light has different speeds in different media and only slowed light particles are visible, because each speed has its own color. Candles are not waves but particles, and there are no spaces between the particles. The smaller they are, the more there are, within the same distance. The smaller they are, the faster they are. If two different masses contain the same energy, is the smallest the fastest, and the bigger it is, the slower it is. When a large particle hits a smaller, continuing the small with the energy it has received, but with a higher speed. Particles of light can thus change the speed.
When the Sun emits a particle that hits our atmosphere, hits the particle that is larger. When it persists, it happens at lower speeds. This speed allows our eye register, and you see a blue-violet color, which is the fastest, the brain can perceive. Thus informed has emerged that here is a particle with a blue velocity. The more the particle is slowed down, the more red it seems. We have a good example of a lunar eclipse. When the Moon entering the Earth’s shadow, the Moon is colored red because the particles are passing through our atmosphere, have slowed light particles, so the Earth has thus a red tail, like comets. Their tail is also slowed light particles. The proof is that the portion of the comet tail, which is closest to the moving direction is blue. When you register a color, you are aware that here is a particle. Velocity seen by the color.
The new Lightlaw
particles of light have different speeds in different media. Only brake light particles are visible. How much they are braked seen by the color, because each speed has its own color. The English scientist Isaac Newton discovered gravity, reaching even as a 24-year-old so momentous achievements that no previous scientist had achieved this. But he published them, perhaps for religious reasons. He joined Cambridge as a teacher of mathematics, but he was also by studying the nature of light. He was once visited by astronomer Edmond Halley, who wanted to know what type planetary paths have if they are determined by an attraction which decreases with the square of the distance to the Sun. Newton could say that it could not calculate with the since-known mathematics, but that he had intended it for over twenty years ago: they were elliptical. Newton worked with many things. He used a prism to a brake light particles. He discovered that the light changed direction – refraction – and that there was a spectrum of colors into view. He assumed that the colors appear in the light and the prism plates these colors. It was not true. A prism has a different thickness, and therefore it slows the incoming particles differently, so that particles of light coming through the prism at different speeds. We also note that the particles move across our line of sight. Our eye registers them words irrespective of their direction. We can use water droplets to slow light particles with. The drop is crystal clear, but light particles have a slower speed in water than in air. When light particles deliver their energy to the larger particles as water droplets consists of continuing these larger particles with the same energy as before. But with a less velocity than before. This slower rate is determined, because each speed has its own color. Einstein’s theory of light speed is possible only in vacuum, which is outside of our atmosphere. The theory is therefore quite useless in our atmosphere. Einstein used the time in his theories, but time does not exist, since it is not material, so therefore, we reach: Time is the distance between events. Space is distance between anything. Spacetime is thus two times nothing.
To repeat: LIGHT – particles of light have different speeds in different media. Only braked particles are visible. Each speed has its own color. Stopping a particles of light gives warmth. Gravitation gravitational particles have different speeds in different lots. Only braked gravitational particles provide gravity. The more they are braked, the greater weight. Stopping the gravitational particle growth.
A trip into space
Ring around the Earth,
the incipient ring formation around the Earth called zodikallight. Once the ring is quite thin, but it increased constantly, so we are on track to get a beautiful ring as we know it around Saturn. The ring is visible when the sun is just below the horizon, because the sun shines on the ring. Try to see at sunset time.
Redshift
When we look at light from distant stars, we see that it is red – for: the farther away stars are, the more red they look like. Red is the slowest of all light. According to science, it has been 15 billion light years underway. The light that does not hit us, but flits past the planet, continues to slow down on its way. Somewhere it is at a standstill and becomes a part of the space in which it ended in. Freed Hoyle had a theory that everything came from nothing. That nothing could be the light particles that have come to the end and is stalled. You can shoot infrared light as the eye can not see, and you discover that there is infrared light from everywhere. When the red light has been 15 billion years in the making, how much longer as infrared light was underway? For the infrared light to a slowing down to zero, there is a long way – and therefore infinitely long. The entire universe is filled with all sorts of radiation. It is their radiation mass called dark matter. It’s all that mass that slows light, when light is slowed down, it takes longer to move the same distance. A light year is therefore variable length. When this black substance is captured by the Sun, it will be immediately sent back on a new “spacetrip”.
Conclusion: The universe has no age – it has always been there.
Comets
colors in a comet tail are light particles. Scientists interpret it this way: the colors of comet tail tells us which fabric tail consists of – each substance its color. It is quite wrong for the tail consists of the brake light particles. The comet is surrounded by a very thin atmosphere that slows down particles of light in the visible spectrum. The extreme in this atmosphere slows only slightly: it gives a blue color, which turns right away from the Sun. The light particles, which come closer to the comet, slowed more, and it gives a slightly warmer color and are slightly slower than the blue. Therefore, they bend a little, so that the blue color always the one who is against the direction of motion around the Sun. This is proof that it is light particles we see. The light particles, which consists of the tail, hitting not our eye, which then detects all particles with a certain speed.
Sun
Since we have never seen the sun, but its most brilliant atmosphere, we will now poke your nose in the solar atmosphere to see how it looks there. It looks like the interior of the Helix nebula. Sun is very small compared to what it looks like here on Earth. There are thousands of miles from the atmosphere down to the Sun. What you see in the pages is the atmosphere that slows down particles of light in the visible spectrum and thus have the color that indicates particles of light speed. We notice that the color behind the sun is blue. It is the fastest color as the light has when it hits the bottom of the atmosphere. The Sun has sent its atmosphere high up – the hotter it gets, the higher. Extremely color is yellow. When light particles have passed through the atmosphere, it comes out in the corona, which does not brake light particles as well as the atmosphere did, so here are white. The corona consists of small particles that the Sun’s gravity has captured. These particles have a high speed, and scientists argue that this high velocity tells us how hot it is. It is wrong! The more weight, the higher speed. Extremely in the corona, we find a blue aura. The reason is that the corona becomes thinner and thinner, the farther away from the sun we get. The thinner it gets, the less drag on the particles of light. Therefore, the color blue, then be violet and ultraviolet. In the blank space to continue our particles of light as a particle stream that forms the waves when they hit a lot. When light particles hit the outer reaches of our atmosphere, it repeats the whole thing, but now in reverse order: first, an ultraviolet radiation, then purple, then slowed it down to blue (hence the sky is blue),
the new law for light particles (unlike Einstein)
particles of light have different speeds in different lots and different gravitational fields. Only brake light particles are visible. The fastest is blue, the slowest red. A particles of lights kinetic energy turns into heat when it is stopped. Einstein figured in “his” light with a velocity of 300,000 km / sec. – Even as a constant. But only in vacuum. Such a vacuum exists outside of our atmosphere – not particularly interesting, since it can not be seen. So why do you call it perhaps too bright? Niels Bohr had theories of elementary particles. Now we are more interested in particles than in waves, as the particles are the cause of the waves in a mass. The empty space is not empty – it is filled with invisible particles.
Gravity.
Gravity Particles called gravity. They have a much greater penetration than light particles. We have seen how the water droplet could be braked for the light particles. Thus, the earth also constricts the gravitational particles. This means that those who frames the Earth’s surface are faster than those who have been through the Earth. This difference is called the Earth’s gravity. In addition to the braking of the gravitational particles, there are also some who are trapped, and when some did not pass through the earth. But Earth’s mass has been increased because of gravity particles have more kinetic energy than light particles, so the capture gives warmth. If that were captured twice as many particles, the earth would grow twice as fast and twice as hot.
We can therefore infer a new law: the greater the weight is on a celestial body, the hotter it is and the faster it will be even larger. When a submarine dive, increasing the pressure that surrounds it as how deep it dives. Earth is not an ocean, and yet are Earth bombarded from all sides of gravitational particles. Moon shields the particles that come from that direction. Therefore, the greater the pressure from all directions. We will therefore not attracted to the Earth. We are attracted to space. We’re in gravityocean.
What causes gravity?
If we start with the opposite of attraction, then an explosion, we see that the faster the mass decreases its density, the stronger the explosion, and the higher the temperature. It tells us that a lot, which reduces its density, repulsion – the faster the mass density decreases, the greater the repulsion. Now an explosion nothing to do with gravity, but it shows us much: the hotter, the stronger.
Gravity is the opposite of repulsion:
attraction, ie. to a mass, which increases its density, attraction. What can then increase the density of Earth’s example – it has the attraction. It can be an external radiation that runs through everything with a huge speed greater than light. The smaller a particle, the higher speed it has. The small gravitational particles, the smallest available because of their high speed, not deflected. Particles of light have different speeds in different lots, and penetration-ability is different from light, x-rays, neutrons and gravity. When gravitational particles traveling through the Earth slows down, just as light particles do. This means that there is a stronger radiation from the outside than the inside out. The difference is precisely the attraction.
The new cognition
discovery of gravitational particles have turned upside down a lot. It is believed that the Earth is cooling, because the Earth’s internal heat emitted from the surface and disappear into thin air. But it is just the opposite. Earth uses its mass to capture gravity particles every time it catches a particle that gives this its kinetic energy as heat, and although the gravitational particles are extremely small, increase the constant mass of the Earth, so Earth will capture more and more gravity particles. The result: an ever larger and larger Earth with ever higher internal temperature.
New natural law
The less a free particle, the more momentum it has to. It is the only self-defense, the particle has. Since gravitational particles are the smallest, they are also the heaviest, far faster than light particles. Sun’s corona is small particles that will need to have a high speed to avoid being captured by the Sun’s gravity.
New gravitation
Gravitational particles have different speeds in different celestial bodies. The bigger the mass, the more gravity particles captures it. The more it captures the larger it becomes. Capture leads to growth, warmth and allure. It’s not Earth, prefers – it’s the room to press. Planets use their mass to slow down and capture the gravity particles. A trapped gravitational particle delivers its kinetic energy as heat. A trapped particle does not come out the other side. Particle flow from the outside in is larger than that goes from the inside out. The difference is what we call the strength of mass attraction. The greater attraction a planet has, the hotter it occurs a vacuum, which we call attraction.
Atmosphere
When a celestial body has grown to lunar size, approaching its gravity to the point where it can begin to sustain an incipient atmosphere. All celestial bodies are growing and getting their atmosphere increasing with the increasing gravity. Venus has a mass that is slightly smaller than Earth and has an air pressure of 90 atmospheres. Earth has about 100 atmospheres. But our air is only 1 atmosphere. Why now when we have the same terms as Venus, we followed the sun around the universe like Venus. If we look at Mars, it is clear that there have been rivers and water up there. This is apparently gone. There must have been a large celestial body that has come over and run away with almost all of our atmosphere, so there has been only around one quarter back atmosphere, which may have resulted in huge waves and earthquakes. All the life that had an internal pressure of 100 atmospheres. But our air is only 1 atmosphere. Why now when we have the same terms as Venus, we followed the sun around the universe like Venus. If we look at Mars, it is clear that there have been rivers and water up there. This is apparently gone. There must have been a large celestial body that has come over and run away with almost all of our atmosphere, so there has been only around one quarter back atmosphere, which may have resulted in huge waves and earthquakes. All the life that had an internal pressure of 100 atmospheres must have exploded, so there was only life left in the oceans. Earth still follows the sun’s track and captures all the time more atmosphere. The slow progress in the so-called empty space. It increased by only 1 millibars in 40 years, but will go faster and faster.
Heat Death
For many, many years ago, the entire African continent both green and lush. Low pressure tracks ran into the storm, where especially the Bay of Biscay was hit. Now that the sea has become warmer, resulting low-pressure belt in the north. The southernmost of the belt is France, and is the northernmost Norway. In addition, our altitudes also increase. This means that the winds increasing in strength. In the old days when depressions went south on us, we had often very harsh winters with easterly winds. When depressions ranging over us, or further north, as there is a tendency to become the opposite of wind, heat and water from the west. As the Earth’s internal temperature rises, formed in areas of desert, and it spreads all the time, both south and north. Soon jumping desert across the Mediterranean. Here is a recap of the above explanation short form: A mass of gravity tells us how fast it grows. Earth’s growth is taking place inside. Earth’s growth is greater now than before. Earth’s growth increases our air pressure. Earth’s growth makes our kilo seemed heavier. A mass gravitational tells how hot it is. The greater the attraction, the hotter paste. The warmer, the greater radiance. The smaller mass, the more colder. The smaller mass, the more slower growth. A mass that decreases its density, the repulsion. Universe Eternal change has always been there. The warmer the mass, the greater the distance to the atmosphere. The greater the sun, the greater speed. Black fabric is non-braked particles. Redshift are particles that are not hampered. The smaller the particles slowed down, the greater the speed they get. Each speed its color. Comet tails are slowed light particles. Waves in a mass caused by particles. Visible particles are braked particles. The smaller the particle, the greater speed. The capture of particles leads to growth, warmth and allure. Particles of light have different speeds in different lots. Space is distance between anything. Time is distance between events. Everything that happens has a cause. Nothing comes from nothing. Everything that exists consists of something. Therefore Universe materially.
Repulsion – a new dimension
in historical time, we have had many theories about the universe, depending on how far you’ve been in the scientific and technical progress. Already since Isaac Newton about. 300 years ago proposed the first theory of gravity, he added that the masses apparently attraction may be explained by his descendants. He was not even able to explain how the masses (celestial bodies) that were distantly located from each other, could influence each other. This very important addition to Newton’s gravitational theory, however, was quickly forgotten – and it is still undetected by today’s scientists! But Newton was right – he just lacked something:
Repulsion!
Repulsion due to a mass reduces its density! The highest speed of the repulsion exists in the black suns in returning gravitational particles. About 250 years later created the Albert Einstein a new universe, the relative universe where the speed of light is constant at approx. 300,000 km per second. Only at a late stage in his life, he recognized that light particles have mass and that they – like all other lots – is influenced by gravity. Einstein was not right in his assertion lightconsistens, but he was right in the assertion of light mass.
New questions and answers,
Anyone wishing to disprove my gravitation, will be struggling. He or she must then also prove that an explosion has the attraction – and it is not so easy. Earlier attempts rejection of my theories have not provided my gravitation, which is the essential background for my thoughts. My new laws are having separate types, and some will argue with me about these matters, they are very welcome. There are apparently no one has dared, to open the debate by saying that my gravitation, opens up several new and exciting questions, and to provide answers to some of them. Eg solves my problem of gravitation, which science struggles with today without coming to a sensible solution. One knows that the Moon moves away from Earth, and assuming a long enough back in time, you can count on their way to the distance between Earth and the Moon once only been a few earth-radii. But with such a short distance between them, the two planet mutual gravitational have ripped them both to smithereens.
Why is this not happening? Because you are not aware that both the Earth and Moon in the past were much smaller than today. If you count backwards in time, one in my gravitation also count on much smaller planets, with smaller globes will also be less attraction and that is why the Earth and Moon have not ripped each other to pieces in the past. It is astonishing that the researchers did not have long taken this into account when they have tried to solve the problem. The same energy that causes the Moon moves away from Earth, is also true in the Earth to the Sun.
Are we moving away from the Sun?
As the earth has more attraction than the Moon, it grows faster then also, since we do reminds us that the strength of a mass appeal tells us how fast it grows.
QUESTION
Will this mean that when the Earth has just as much mass as Saturn, so we are as far from the sun as Saturn is today? Will we also have equally thick atmosphere like Saturn have today? Will we also have an equally beautiful ring system? If the Earth and the Moon does not become engulfed by another large celestial body, will they grow and become a double pair of suns, which runs around a common center of gravity? In which case speed will be a planet to the sun?
Absorption and slowing
everything substance which is composed of a number of atoms is so porous. Is there enough substance, and the density high enough, the individual gravitational particles out of a large amount that passes through this porous material, sooner or later hit a or several of its atoms and thereby reduced its speed. Some gravitational particles will even be stopped completely and remain in the lot, they were about to pass while others will pass through at reduced speed. When no particles can not get out through a lot, they must be there. For example, the globe has increased, and thus its inner temperature increased, because a slowdown of the particles produces heat. If you look what’s going on, then these gravitational particles be very, very small and they must have a speed, which is far above what one of Lesage’s time imagined. Deceleration GRAVITY PARTICLERS SPEED Man “disproved” then Lesage’s theory by postulating that particle slowdown would produce much more heat than might at observation was noted. Lesage was not aware that the particles slow down as they pass through a lot. The closer the mass, the more reduced the speed of gravity particles. If there was more than that gravitational particle velocity sat down, we could of mass decrease speed to see how much weight the particles slowed, but there would not be either capture or growth. The new and exciting is that there were some gravitational particles not passed through the mass. This mass was increased – and now we can say that the strength of a mass appeal tells us how fast it grows. All lots with attraction grows, and the strength of attraction tells us how fast it grows. What we call gravity is the result of this slowdown and the capture of gravitational particles. The strength of a mass appeal tells us how fast it grows and how its internal temperature.
Problem
Try to go to the library and find out Newton’s theories vs. Arne Gabs’ theories. Try to find something about Lesage (library or internet). If Arne Gabs is right to change it because our perception of space? Discuss. The so-called “accepted” science will often not known at other ways of explaining things, so the texts you have read here can be a challenge for science. But Arne Gabs will go down in history of science, because he is hard to refute.
Suns made of gravity particles have been identified meant that the sun is created by condenses the enormous gas clouds. I believe that all lots of attraction has the ability to be both brakes gravitational particles, and also absorbs them. This absorption gives further growth, and finally the mass so dense that atomic processes begin. A NEW SUN UP – THE EMPHASIS OF PARTICLES When these suns eventually becomes very large and very dense, they will slow down the particles of light which they emit more and more. The more weight brakes particles of light energy, the less energy leaves the sun with. Gradually, the most energetic light particles, which were ultra-violet, slowed down so much that they now have infrared and therefore invisible to the other end of the spectrum. OUR SUN HAS BEEN TO A BLACK SUN emits the still invisible infrared light, but now its internal temperature soaring, because it can not get rid of its heat sufficiently rapidly by radiation. A NEW RADIATION YESTERDAY STARTED – A RADIATION OF EMPHASIS PARTICLES They can only come here in a black sun, where there is tremendous pressure and extremely high temperatures. If the black sun internal temperature is still rising, it will only lead to the removal of gravitational particles until there is balance. It shows that gravitational particles speed is much greater than the speed of light. Problems for “Suns” What do you think about this theory, which is not in accordance with the established science? Discuss and write down. Can it really be that the author is right in saying that gravitational particles speed is greater than the speed of light? If it is true, we must change our perception of space. Discuss and write down. Gravity slows light’s energy. What do you think? There is plenty to tackle. Go online and look forward to other scientists’ theories such as Newton, and compare with those made here theories.
Time
EXIST NOT PHYSICALLY If the broadcast of gravity particles as an explosion? In that case, my kg-weight roads differently before and after the explosion – and it does not! It is rather as an evaporation. And when the black sun is composed of all sorts of elements – even the densest – consists of gravity particles of a mixture of all possible elements to be distributed throughout the universe, then be a part of the celestial bodies, which they then become absorbed by. This new process takes much longer, but in this new universe is thus linked: EXIST NOT FYSISIK – THE HUMAN IS CREATED! This condition is achieved before the mixture is quite close – it is popularly called a “black hole”. So there is no Big Bang, which should be beginning of the universe. There is no “black holes” which are the universe’s death. There is neither the beginning nor an end to our universe – creation going on constantly. THE NEW UNIVERSE IS A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE – without beginning and without end in both space and time – and it continues under perpetual change. Problems for “Time” No black holes, no Big Bang. What do you think? Discuss and seek information where I can. Try also to look at what the Greek philosopher Democritus believed. Search also Frithjof Capra: Tao of Physics. Or find Taoist texts. Search in Lao Tzu. We are deep into life’s mysteries here and it might seem that Arne Gabs is right. We still “just” to get his theory on the formula, so you have a bid, please let us know you. Creation takes place all the time. It is the science by realizing now, so maybe formal education an impossibility, because it is just as restrictive as the language is when it comes to expressing emotions. Discuss.
Time, space as well as simultaneity and motion is not relative but absolute physical phenomena. There is no physical space-time – nothing physical world interval – no physical world lines. Electron dynamics are part of the simple Newtonian mechanics – and not vice versa! Einstein changed erroneously Newton’s mechanics and kinematics, but failed to return to direct the yet undiscovered error – namely isotope error and backscatter error. Had Einstein known these two errors would Lorentz transformation have been unnecessary as there was no need for any “bridge” since the ether disappeared. Space is three dimensional. It has neither four or more dimensions! Einstein claimed he was using to his own format for the Lorentz transformation had resolved Michelson-test conundrum, and the same repeats all relativity physicists after him. Einstein’s explanation is wrong! The right is that light propagate at different speeds in all directions. Einstein changed the classical physics kinematics despite the fact that it was true. “So far Marius Gormsen. His books are written in a difficult way but the quotes above are certainly crisp and clear and provides food for thought. Einstein swapped physics on with mathematics, and in terms of spacetime traded him about the cause and effect. When something crumbs in his movement in space, it is because of the weight. It is not the curvature that creates gravity, but gravity that creates the curvature. thus also vanished Einstein spacetime . Mathematics is a language like Latin. For my sake, one can speak the language you want, as long as one is not doing about the logic and reverses the cause and effect.
The new universe
In my new universe is gravity the determinative factor – ANYWHERE . As mentioned earlier all know how gravity works, but not WHY. I attach weight both velocity and mass: The maximum possible speed well in excess of light, the minimum possible mass. Although gravity particles mass is exceedingly small, I am convinced that these appear in different sizes, consisting of all possible elements – all immeasurably small. In the large masses of the world are plenty of all possible sizes, and I see no reason to assume that it is not true in the smallest masses world. My universe has no artificial boundaries, either in size or speed. Since gravitational particles have an enormous speed, they also have a huge effect. Hence need not so many of them to achieve the results we recognize that weight. Thin notion of the great masses of the world, suns, planets and moons, consists mainly of masses intervals between the individual elementary particles, ie. they are extremely porous. Gravity Particles passing therefore – almost unimpeded – through everything. But individual gravitational particles absorbed by the masses, they move in. It means a corresponding growth of the masses. Just as the light that has different speeds in different media so it is with gravity particles that have different speeds in different densities. THERE IS HERE, THE NEW UNIVERSE IS INTRODUCED. Everything is porous Comparing gravitational particles of light particles, the latter has the advantage that they can be seen – in contrast to gravitational particles, which we can ascertain the effects of. If, for example diving into the ocean, then you will find that the deeper we dig, the more darker there. The light is absorbed by the water masses, it passes, and get far enough down, there will finally completely dark. Similarly, I imagine that some of the gravitational particles absorbed by the masses they pass. Since the masses are very porous, they will – compared to the infinitely small gravitational particles – almost be perceived as a thin haze, which most people pass through, although they may reduce their speed to the speed of gravity particles have masses precisely the density. Comparing the gravitational particles of light particles, light particles have the advantage that they are visible. If there was anything other than gravity particles slows down when passing a lot, there would be no growth in the mass. Let us imagine, for example 100 gravitational particles towards the Earth’s mass. It will, for example 98 units pass unimpeded through the Earth’s porous mass with reduced speed, while 2 is absorbed and becomes part of Earth’s mass. They deliver their kinetic energy as heat. This growing mass of the Earth by 2 gravitational particles, and Earth’s internal temperature increases: the earth is getting bigger and hotter! gravity particles existence Moon When the moon moves away from Earth, one is a proof that it was heavier because it has used its mass to the gravitational capture of particles with the Earth As the Earth also grows, it removes itself from the Sun. This makes year longer and longer. Earth internal temperature is rising, and it explains that there are more and more desert because temperatures are attracted to the surface. Earth’s rising growth results including also that a kg-weight becomes heavier. Earth’s atmospheric layers is increased from 1012 mm to 1015 mm. It increases by 1 per millibars. 40 years.
One day the Earth will have a size as Jupiter, and this will be red hot. The ring around the Earth called Zodikallight that will be prettier and prettier as the Earth’s growth. This ring is naturally bigger and bigger as the Earth’s growth.
Jupiter, this planet may be our next sun. Science must correct the entire concept of solar system formation. Jupiter is hotter than you knew. Under its thick atmosphere is a glowing red ball. It is believed that the planet has a dynamo that creates the heat, but it is decelerated due to gravity particles that creates the heat. Lighting Only hindered light is visible. The color tells us how fast light particles are. This can be seen in a comet tail: the blue color is the front of the comet’s journey around the sun. Heating All celestial bodies are using their mass to the gravitational capture particles. This capture gives way more mass, greater attraction and warmth. Thus, we know how hot all celestial bodies are: the larger and closer they are — the hotter they are. Earth Power Lines The old setup with a weight that hangs on a string, to prove that the attraction is in the center of the Earth, because all the plumb line (power lines) shows the path. This is a misconception Sinker, which is a mass that holds together is not in the sand to fall back on all the atoms that acts foreclosure of pressure coming from the other side. Therefore, it is a middle ground and drops straight down between them – against the shielding mass center. If one – to find out where the Earth’s gravity (attraction) located – look at our plumb line, one must begin digging toward the center of the Earth. If one imagines that one has brought a kg-weight as one underway is considering a regular basis, you will find it easier already the first time you weight. It is because some of Earth’s atoms, which were previously COURSE soldered, now OVER soldered and thus pulls up instead of down. With this change sinker weight was correspondingly less. And when you finally are at the center of the Earth, weighs kg soldered nothing, for now, the Earth’s shielding equally in all directions. And if – to celebrate the end of the journey to Earth’s interior – affix a picnic bottle of champagne right in Earth’s gravitational center, you will find that forming a completely uniform thick layer of champagne from the bottle sides. The many bubbles in the champagne will gather in one big bubble in the center of the cylinder, and this bubble will have the same shape as the bottle. The attraction, in other words now be outward, not inward. Sole and Sole atmosphere emit light particles. These particles traveling freely in the “empty” space. The particles not hit anything running on. For every one billion years they lose around 2% of their speed. They say after 50 billion years at a standstill and turned into what is called a gas. Why? Because surely all suns everywhere constantly emits particles that get stuck, formed a ring of 50 billion kilometers on all suns. When the sun shines all the time, the ring mass is increased continuously. When two such particles fuse together and become one, the growth started. Economic change is slowest in small lots and eventually when they got into the asteroid sizes. The next phase is that it starts to get round as the moon, when it starts to get atmosphere. Mass internal temperature rises with the growth, so one day is the mass surface over 100 degrees. Thus, anything that can evaporate, become clouds that hide the celestial bodies such as Jupiter. Then they begin to emit radiation and becomes a sun – still surrounded by an atmosphere, and is now going faster growth, and the temperature follows with the growth. Now it will be X and what is even more energized that glows in the end, the energy and thus the temperature is so high that the emitted gravitational particles, and thus a new generation coming. The universe is thus a perpetual motion machine.
Arne Gabs (1921-2004)
We abrogate the law of gravity. A pressure and acceleration hypothesis 1962
The logical universe: new visions 1993
The material universe: a Part-teori 2004

How little we know and how exciting to learn just a tiny bit more about our world.

Golly; perhaps Frau Einstein did help develop relativity after all.

The interdimensional portal will be opening in 5… 4… 3… 2… 1…
Now where is that trusty double barrelled shotgun of mine…

The likely cause is pretty obvious really. They are probably out by 18 meters on the exact location of the tank. The facility is in a tank on the side of a 10 Km long tunnel, 1400 m under a mountain. It is notoriously hard to pinpoint a location several Km underground to any degree of accuracy.
But heh, just a dumb engineer here. The propellerheads will probably figure it out given enough time.

I agree with pax – I have no idea what a neutrino is or anything else for that matter.
I understand some of what theory says matter, energy etc may be but beyond that I simply read and get on with my life trying not to become a fear monger or a false prophet.
Oh, and I have a small carbon footprint – size 9.

Ya’ just gotta’ love a site where impressively smart and knowledgeable people mix and mingle with some so ignorant they don’t know what they don’t know. Everybody gets to chip something into the pot, and wallowing around somewhere in there is truth to be found. Democracy in action!

I’m pretty sure what the boffins actually said was that they’ve been unable to find the error. They’re pretty sure there is one though.
What a contrast to Climate Scientists, to whom the concept of error is never contemplated!

The entire experiment was conducted in an accelerated frame (gravity well), rather than in interstellar space.
My math suggests that 1/40,000 is actually less than the dilation effects due to gravity. That still doesn’t sound right to me.
If Neutrinoes were less affected by local gravity, they might still be sub-luminal. They would just be covering a shorter distance than even photons going in a straight line.

Pablo Barham says:
September 22, 2011 at 1:14 pm
”It doesn’t take 100 scientists to prove me wrong, it takes a single fact.” -Albert Einstein
There is the fact…
That doesn’t prove Einstein “wrong”, any more thean Einstein proved Newton “wrong”.
In additon to Newtonian Physics and Einsteinian Physics, it appears we may be on the verge of developing a third Physics.

It would shock me if this experiment proved that Neutrinos can travel at 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light, and I hope it does. I think I know what the numbers add up to and what they mean if this is confirmed. And it is mind blowing.
Does anyone recognize these numbers?
186.282 3.1047 189.3867
186.282 3.14159265 189.42359265
Any physicist or engineer should recognize these, Although these numbers above may not appear relevant, they are if this is confirmed.

Big deal. Carbon dioxide can take the earth out of an ice age 800 years before it enters the atmosphere. Top that, neutrinos! 🙂

Science is settled, model ensemble average is slower than light, no need for checking experimentally.

Looks like time travel back to the past is possible !
Let’s send someone back to cut down that tree on the Yamal Peninsula !!

SØREN BUNDGAARD:
I’ve never meant TL;DR quite so strongly before.
Graeme:
Shotgun? No, the way defending against interdimensional invaders works, is that you start out with a crowbar and work your way up.

Scott Covert says:
September 22, 2011 at 1:59 pm
I am sad to read the Cern quote ““We wanted to find a mistake – trivial mistakes, more complicated mistakes, or nasty effects – and we didn’t,”. That’s just confirmation bias, you have to break through that if you are going to discover anything.
No no no, its not confirmation bias, its real scientists faced with a surprising result using Occams razor to try to find any possible, non revolutionary explanation. The old saw about extraordinary claims and extraordinary evidence surely applies here, and the first step in obtaining very strong evidence is eliminating all possible error sources. This is something climate scientists frequently fail to do – if the graph looks “nice”, thats a wrap – so its great to see how real scientists behave sometimes.
Personally I am very doubtful about this, we’ve measured a lot of neutrinos at lightspeed before now, but if it is true its very exciting.

I for one hope this pans out. Perhaps the rewriting of the “Laws” of physics with a new understanding about speed limits will eliminate the ideas of dark matter and dark energy.
Just like the missing heat, these have only been found in a computer model.

The neutrinos in question are traveling a little east of South East.
That means a component of their direction is with the rotation of the earth.
I wonder what their assumptions were about the frame of reference and the possibility of gravitational “frame-drag.”
500 _____D______km of eastward travel
300,000__c______km/sec
0.001666_ T=D/c __sec travel travel time
2.2______Ve______km/sec = Earth rotational speed eastward
0.0036667__Dt = Ve*T__km frame moves in travel time T
1.22222E-08 ___Tf = Dt/c __ sec from possible frame drag.
Shoot. I only can account for 12 nsec.
Still, wouldn’t be interesting if a gravitational frame of reference is involved in determining the speed of light.

I read that the distance was 730 km and the neutrinos arrived 60 nanoseconds earlier. The speed of light quoted as 299792 km/s. If I divide the speed of light by the distance, I get about 0.00243502 seconds or the time to travel that 730 km. Then I subtracted 60 nanoseconds from the time and divided the distance of 730 km by that reduced time. The results shows a speed of 299799 km/s or 7 km/s faster.
That’s how I read the report. I might have misinterpreted the article.

Nice,
Everything You Know is Wrong!

Neptune is 4.5 billion kilometers removed from the Sun. It takes light 15,000 seconds to travel from the Sun to Neptune. Yet this pair of bodies are attracted to where each other are NOW; there is an instant attraction between them. Therefore, the propagation of gravity is at least 15,000 times faster than the speed of light.

Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is displacing phlogiston thus facilitating a higher local speed of light.

I love this quote from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html
“”We have high confidence in our results. We have checked and rechecked for anything that could have distorted our measurements but we found nothing,” he said. “We now want colleagues to check them independently.””
Wouldn’t it be nice of Mann, Jones or Hansen hadn’t been so corrupted by government money that they would adhere to the scientific method like this?

Sully Augustine says:
September 22, 2011 at 8:10 pm
Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is displacing phlogiston thus facilitating a higher local speed of light.
Say what?

Isn’t Cerenkov radiation where charged particles travel faster than light? – at least the phase velocity of light within a particular medium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
This gives the blue glow from nuclear reactor cores.

I think this was discovered a couple of years ago.

Luboš ain’t buying it:
…..this error could erase most of the 60-nanosecond discrepancy…..
http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/09/italian-out-of-tune-superluminal.html#more
His string theory math makes my head hurt. So I won’t argue with him, or much less with Einstein, on this one.
😉

Sparks said;
Does anyone recognize these numbers?
186.282 3.1047 189.3867
186.282 3.14159265 189.42359265
I see the speed of light (186.282) and pi (3.14159265) but I am not sure about the others …

The fact that the observed speed is just a tad faster than light, just a bit more than “statistically significant”, is a bit of a red flag for me. It suggests variability or error in the experiment. If FTL were not a fundemental limit, then we should expect to see relatively huge differences.

“neutrinos — one of the strangest well-known particles in physics”
Neutrinos are well-known?

Aha, now I get it! It is Global Warming that is upsetting the speed of light!

Thank God – they are finally waking up to the facts.
I was always sure that – once properly considered – the scientists’ mantra that nothing could travel faster than the speed of light, was nothing but a modern version of one of Zenon’s paradoxes which is known as The Paradox of Motion, or “Achilles and the tortoise”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise
Having come thus far, science may – just MAY – one day also understand that, particles traveling faster than the speed of light exist, in fact, not only in traces, but in abundance in the Universe – because they are what Astronomy, for a a lack of better understanding, today calls “Dark Matter” – interacting only via it’s gravity with sub-light-matter.
Factor in faster-than-light particles into classic astronomy, and you will finally adjust astronomical calculations to the measured facts.
“Boy, do I love being right all the time!”
(Transcended from the golden words of Dr. Ian Malcolm, aka Jeff Goldblum, in “Jurassic Park”)

German professor Gunther Nimtz – Univiersities of Cologne and Bonn, Germany – conducted a large-scale reasearch culminating in the theory, that particles, as well as electromagnetic waves, can travel faster than light.
He calls the effect he uses for making matter and electromagnetic signals going faster than light “tunnelling”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Nimtz
And, by the way, his results are a much LESS “highly debated topic” than Wikipedia wants you to make believe – while “which only a minority of researchers considers as correct”, according to my understanding, does in no way disqualify his findings as wrong, anyway – for Galileo Galilei’s findings on the Heliocentric Solar System also were defamed as a theory, “”which only a minority of researchers considers as correct” in his days…
So, is the science settled in this area? Hell, no, it isn’t!
But it’s fascinating – isn’t it?

To quote myself:
“Having come thus far, science may – just MAY – one day also understand that, particles traveling faster than the speed of light exist, in fact, not only in traces, but in abundance in the Universe – because they are what Astronomy, for a a lack of better understanding, today calls “Dark Matter” – interacting only via it’s gravity with sub-light-matter.”
Addendum:
Dark Energy is nothing but Dark-(faster-than-light)-Matter to, which only is arranged in a huge, Universe-wide halo, PULLING sub-light-matter outwards with it’s humonous gravity, thus giving an observer from the inside the impression, there exists an equal force PUSHING sub-light-matter to the edges of the Universe. That way, Redshift is caused by faster-than-light particles, too.

@ SØREN BUNDGAARD
September 22, 2011 at 3:07 pm
———————————————————————————
“F”
create a blog yourself, please.

DocMartyn, you contradict yourself. Why, in your universe, is the light hitting the train at LS? Say, two trains are heading on each other with a mirror at their front… go ahead.
All our measurements of the speed of light showed it to be constant at any speed difference.

The good news is that they are being skeptical of their findings!

Rabe:
The speed of light will always be c, as distance is measured in lightseconds nowadays. It has become a definition.

Dan says:
September 23, 2011 at 12:22 am
You only need less than a year at 1g to reach c if in a rocket. I find it hard to believe the acceleration would cease just like that at or near c. And in reference to what?
———————————————————–
Well said. That’s the result of my own calculations, too. In an empty, dark space without reference points, a given force will always and ever result in an equal counterforce – here: rocket-engine-thrust and accelleration – and will change the speed of the spaceship you are in accordingly. Anyway, you will only be able to measure accelleration – let’s say 1 g – over time – let’s say 1 year. But you will NEVER, EVER be able to truly calculate the exact speed resulting for said spaceship by measuring accelleration and time, due to the uncertainty about your initial speed and direction your spaceship was traveling prior to firing the rocket (aka: no reference points). So, yes, you might as well go way faster than the speed of light then – without even noticing.
Again, this “C-Thing” equates to yet-another of Zenon’s paradoxes to me. But, while in Zenon’s paradox about Herakles and the turtle it was distance – aka: SPACE – he was mistaking for being absolute, Einstein in his calculation is mistaking TIME for absolute – due to a simple, mathematical error:
Math states that, if, in a calculation, the divisor is “0”, the divident will per defnition turn infinite.
But in physics, when you reduce the time the given mass of an object needs to travel a certain distance to”0″, the mass of said object, in fact, remains just like it always was, while only the time it needs to travel will be reduced to “0”, or even becomes negative.
The infinite increase of mass you get by calculating Energy = Mass times Velocity square – may be mathematically sound – yet, it doesn’t match reality.
Oh, yes, I know, I will get a good beat-up for that statement now. But I stand to it. And no – Nukes are NOT disproving my point. I rather suppose that, in nuclear fusion, fission and decay, a mechanism plays out which, by sheer coincidence, happens to work at sub-atomar levels according to Einstein’s famous equation. But in the atomar and molecular world, things are different from it.
(Sorry, I am German and have to translate mathematical terms into english to my best knowledge. Please, correct me, where I am wrong.)

I’m singularly unimpressed that it is reported that the experiment has been done 15,000 times and yielded the same results. If there is something wrong with the underlying assumptions or data you can do it an infinite number of times and obtain a false result on every occasion. The patth length isn’t being checked 15,000 times, is it? So if that is wrong then the results will always be wrong.
As I mentioned before, I consider it most likely that the path length has been wrongly calculated with 18 metre/60 ft error. Of course, the other possibility is that the ultimate ‘speed barrier’ is just a tiny fraction higher than what has previously been thought, i.e. 299,799,850 metres per second rather than 299,792,458 metres per second for light, with photons travelling at just below this speed barrier. OK, so photons have been consistently measured at 299,792,458 metres per second. So what? Has anyone considered that maybe photons don’t go at the ultimate speed, and that all the measurements of contraction, time dilation, mass increase for particles with rest mass etc as one approaches the speed of light would be very similar if it was referenced to 299,799,850 metres per second instead. Would tiny discrepancies between these have even been noticed?
Since 1983 the speed of light has been ‘defined’ as 299,792,458 m/s, so if it is measured differently from the definition then this affects the length of the metre. I’m a bit uncomfortable with defining the speed of light as an absolute fixed constant, because it begs the question about the speed of light being a universal and invariant constant. The speed of propagation of photons in vacuo can be calculated by electrostatic and magnetostatic measurements of the properties of the vacuum, i.e. the permittivity and permeability of the vacuum, without doing any measurements of speed at all – this just falls out of classical physics (Maxwell’s equations) – it can all be predicted from static measurements. But of course, measurements of permeability and permittivity are inherently tied to electromagnetism and photons (and ‘virtual photons’) and so determine the velocity of electromagnetic radiation – the speed of ‘light’. Neutrinos are not photons and, unlike photons, appear to have a tiny rest mass, which according to the Standard Model they shouldn’t have. So little is understood about neutrinos, and what we do know seems to challenge the Standard Model so we are likely to be in for an overhaul of physics some time soon.

Whatever the outcome, after the scrutiny of the community of physicists – the simple fact that the CERN researchers have put this out to the public and ask for scrutiny is a lesson the climate scientists ought to learn a.s.a.p.
This report shows to all and sundry how proper science should be done.
Applause!

It has been my hope that the scientists at Cern would measure them selves out of business.
It would appear that is happening, the Higgs bosun has gone missing and now this extraneous particle has exceeded the speed limit. Sirs at Cern please tell us what is gravity, electricity, magnetism, it would be nice to know these things before you tell us about the wonderful spin and charm of your imaginary particles. I can thank you for your openness in asking others to look at your results but I would prefer that you all digressed one hundred years and started anew.
Quantum mechanics and the standard model is looking iffy.

Stupid question, but did they account for the curvature of the earth? Its pretty easy to hop on Google Earth and measure the distance between the source and receiver, but that is the distance along the surface of the earth. Since the neutrinos are travelling in a straight line they will travel along the chord of that arc, which over the distances they are travelling would more than account for the difference.
Not saying they would make that mistake, but then NASA lost a Mars mission due to the conversion between miles and kilometers, so its not inconceivable.

TheBigYinJames says:
September 23, 2011 at 12:33 am
Amusing as it might be, some of the displays of scientific ignorance on this thread just give more ammo to the warmists that we are a bunch of loons.
+++++++++++++
And they are bunch of humourless, pessimist morons.

Chris in Hervey Bay [September 22, 2011 at 5:13 pm] says:
“Looks like time travel back to the past is possible !
Let’s send someone back to cut down that tree on the Yamal Peninsula !!”

Very clever! That would save us some real money.

KevinK [September 22, 2011 at 9:38 pm] says:
“Never heard of a Dark Emitting Diode (i.e. DED) ? , just plug a Light Emitting Diode (LED) into your AC power lines (or the “mains” in Europe) after that it emits dark whenever electricity is applied.”

We used to call them Smoke Emitting Diodes back in the day!

Wednesday, 19 July, 2000
http://www.princeton.edu/~adogariu/fast/propag.gif
Beam smashes light barrier
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/841690.stm
“Scientists have seen a pulse of light emerge from a cloud of gas before it even entered.
“This astonishing and baffling observation was made by researchers from the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, US. “They conducted an experiment that involved lasers, a chamber containing cold caesium atoms and a super-fast stopwatch.
“The end result was a beam of light that moved at 300 times the theoretical limit for the speed of light. ”
http://www.google.com/search?q=Wang+Experiment%3A+Light+Traveling+Faster+Than+Light

“The result – which threatens to upend a century of physics – will be put online for scrutiny by other scientists.”
Didn’t someone clue these guys in that the scientific method is passe?
It’s true, the science is settled, so god God, hide that data!

Ok, interesting if real, but le’ts look at the numbers. A distance of 730km at the speed of light should take about 2 milliseconds. They claim that the neutrinos arrived 60 nano seconds too early. This represents only 1 part in a million deviation. The distance deviation is 18 metres. In other words, if the actual distance was 18 metres less than believed, this would account for the early arrival. Somehow, I can’t see them making a measurement error of this magnitude. There may be a possible explanation, though I can’t think of any.

DirkH says:
September 22, 2011 at 2:52 pm
CO2 makes particles travel faster than light. We have to reduce our carbon emissions if we want to preserve causality.

The ice core data proves this. We know the ice core data shows first it gets warm and CO2 levels lag by an average of 800 years. We also know that increased CO2 causes warming. Therefore, the CO2 from the future caused the warming in the past and therefore the CO2 must have traveled back in time to do this.
It’s basic physics/logic/climate science.

If you look at the basic relativistic equations, you see that any hypothetical particle going faster than the speed of light introduces a factor proportional to the square root of minus one into the equations. So far, there has been no physical meaning given to this indication. It is like negative energy or negative absolute temperatures. If complex numbers can have significance for physical parameters, then the only thing that is really forbidden by these equations is a particle with nonzero rest mass going at exactly the speed of light. The speed-of-light limitation is based on the assumption that physical parameters can only be represented by real numbers.
There have been proposed particles called tachyons that introduce an extra minus one in the square root term of these equations, such that they cannot go *slower* than the speed of light. Perhaps they will find that these neutrinos have just been ‘tachyonized.’

Haven’t you people learned anything from the climate hoax? Science is now ALL about hype and funding. The hucksters, er scientists, at CERN are desperate to feed their enormously expensive black hole for money. This is just one in a weekly series of press releases designed to justify their existence and convince the Euro bureaucrats to keep wasting money on these bozos. Remember all the hype about the Higgs boson over the last year? Well what happened – nothing. The same will be true for this “discovery” – after milking it for several months or a year there will be a little noticed release saying in so many words “never mind.” The CERN people are highly educated parasites that need to be kicked out into the real world and to get a real job, i.e., they need to become productive members of society.

Neutrinos are clocked moving faster than the speed of light and are promptly ticketed by a North Carolina State Trooper.

COMMENT FROM THE NEUTRINO WEB BLOG:
‘…………………………………I personally doubt the result but…Violation of the light cones superficially occurs if black holes evaporate.
The two detectors measuring the velocity are measuring two different “things”. An entanglement occurring across the light cone might result in part of probability distribution on one side or the other; while averaging out to the null-geodesic. Of course I don’t like the quantum theories preempting GR; aprior assuming they are better…………………….’

It looks like this story has already shown up in the Wikipedia…..
“Currently there is research from CERN and Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso suggesting the existence of tachyonic neutrinos. More information will be provided in the coming days.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

So….. Neutrinos change flavour AND break the speed limit….. I think they are gonna have to look at their neutrino model…. It’s broken.

What if light in vacuum is going a bit slower than the “speed of light” and neutrinos know the actual speed limit better?

I seem to remember hearing of a theoretical particle called a tachyon which travelled faster than C but that was ok, apparently, because it never travelled slower than C. Maybe that is the culprit.

Wow! So many comments, so quickly!
If we assume the speed of light (in vaccum) cannot be exceeded, then these neutrinos must be taking a more direct route. Light must follow curving space/time to reach it’s target. Neutrinos may be able to short cut this route. Can everyone say “hyperspace”?
Tachyons, FTL, hyperspace… I seem to have awoken this morning inside a Star Trek episode!
Exciting times to be alive. GK

These relativity deniers are clearly funded by Big Gravity.
They are paid to make such claims to sew the seeds of doubt about relativity.
They will continue to obfuscate, distort the science and otherwise lead people down the path to interstellar travel which is known to be impossible.
The vast majority of scientists agree; the speed of light IS the law.

Crispin in Waterloo:
September 23, 2011 at 1:04 pm
If I’m reading your comment correctly, it would seem to support my own private hypothesis/conjecture that the universe as a single body has velocity. This being a simple accounting of mass without the need for Higgs, dark matter etc. The problem of “traveling through what” may be answerable. GK

Roger Sowell says:
September 22, 2011 at 8:09 pm
“My money’s on Einstein. Faster-than-light requires infinite energy. Not about to happen in this universe.”
Accelerating any particle with a rest mass to the speed of light requires infinite energy. A particle could exist at or above C and not be so tethered. Above C it would take infinite energy to slow it down to C, or so I have read.

What a load of rubbish. Nothing can go faster than the speed of light. Nothing!
Some commenters on this page make some really good explanations for this pheonomenon. But to be on the save side:
-To CERN: Why not do this experiment again and again to be sure that neutrinos can go faster than the speed of light? Make another measurement of the real distance and find out if these particles can or cannot go faster than c.
The best explanation I read so far came from Leonard with his theory of solid Earth tides which can make distances shorter or longer than the average distance. Maybe something overlooked by the CERN scientists.
Very curious what happens in the near future with this phenomenon. It could be just a small disruption in the space-time continuum along the track causing this measurement mistake.

Usually what happens in cases like this, the old theory is not proved to be wrong, just incomplete. Often, this only involves a minor correction in an obscure set of special case calculations. For practical work, Newtonian mechanics are still used for engineering calculations because most mechanical systems do not have working parts with relative velocities that are an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.
Of course, at this stage we don’t have real proof yet, just a possible indication than might be invalidated by a calibration error. Neutrinos are very hard to detect, so knowing exactly when they were emitted and when they arrived may be problematic.

While I’m not a high-energy particle physicist, I’d sooner believe that there was a very slight miss-measurement of the geodesic distance of the time-space curvature, than I’d believe a very slight exceeding of the speed of light in a vacuum. Space and time are much more variable than C!

Tim Minchin says:

And why isn’t the theory of relativity m x c cubed?

Because m * c^3 does not have the units of energy.
A question a little harder to answer (well…at least for a physicist as far removed from studying relativity as I am) is why it is exactly m * c^2 and not, say, (1/2)*m*c^2 or 2*pi*m*c^2.

The pre-release paper can be found here:
http://static.arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4897.pdf
For those of you who think they have measured the distance wrong, they are (claimed to be) accurate to 20cm. The distance is measured with sufficient precision that they can see continental drift and the effect of an earthquake in 2009. There is also a whole bunch of other highly technical stuff that I don’t follow that is considered a possible systematic errors, so it is not as if they haven’t thought about it.

It may not be necessary to look for gravitational effects to explain the approximately 66 nanosecond (20 meter) propagation time shortfall. For example, consider that (a) the earth is rotating about its polar axis, and (b) the center of the earth is rotating about the sun. As such, to analyze the time required for light (or any object) to propagate between two points fixed in or on the surface of the earth, we must examine the problem relative to an inertial reference frame. This means we can’t simply treat the propagation distance as being 732 km.
Let’s assume the sun is a negligible-mass star at rest with respect to an inertial reference frame. Further, assume a second negligible-mass object-of-interest is rotating at a constant angular rotation rate of 2x(10-7) radians per second in a circle about the sun at a distance of 93,000,000 miles. These are, respectively, (a) the approximate angular rotation rate of the center of the earth about the sun and, (b) the approximate distance between the sun and the earth. We assume the circular motion is not the result of gravitational pull, but rather is produced by a “thruster” on the rotating object that always points towards the sun. In such a configuration, gravity can be ignored. But the fact that object-of-interest is traveling is a circular path relative to an inertial reference frame means that a reference frame in which the object is at rest is NOT an inertial reference frame. The postulates of special relativity apply only to inertial reference frames. As such, to compute inertial-space propagation times between objects fixed relative to a rotating reference frame, we must take into account all rotational motion effects.
To first order, an object traveling near the speed of light will take approximately 0.0024 seconds to propagate a distance of 732 km. Relative to our inertial reference frame, in 0.0024 seconds the object-of-interest rotating about the sun will move a distance of approximately 235 feet. Depending on the direction of neutrino propagation relative to the direction of object-of-interest motion, at the speed of light (approximately 1 foot per nanosecond), to first order this rotational motion can result in a neutrino propagation time “delta” relative to an inertial reference frame neutrino propagation time anywhere from -235 nanoseconds to +235 nanoseconds. Now I don’t know whether this effect has been considered or ignored. However, if it has been ignored, it has the potential to provide the approximate 67 nanosecond error mentioned in this post.
If this is the source of the discrepancy, I believe there is a way to establish that fact. In particular, as the earth rotates about its polar axis the direction of neutrino propagation relative to the motion of the center of the earth about the sun changes with time. Over a 24-hour period, the orbital-plane component of the neutrino direction of propagation relative to the direction of object rotational motion about the sun passes through a maximum (positive value), passes through approximately zero, and passes through a minimum (negative value). By measuring the propagation time (a) when the direction of neutrino propagation is in the direction of earth-center rotational motion about the sun, (b) when direction of neutrino propagation is opposite to the direction of earth-center rotational motion about the sun, and (c) when direction of neutrino propagation is approximately perpendicular to the direction of earth-center rotational motion about the sun, the propagation time delta should change sign and pass through zero. If the propagation time doesn’t so behave, this phenomenon (rotational coordinate system effects) cannot be the source of the discrepancy.
I also did a back-of-the envelope calculation of earth rotational effects about its polar axis. Over a distance of 732 kilometers, the maximum delta to inertial system propagation time is approximately 3.7 nanoseconds–so I don’t believe rotational motion about the earth’s polar axis can be the source of the 67 nanosecond discrepancy.

“”””” pwl says:
September 23, 2011 at 9:15 pm
It ain’t over till the fat lady Neutrina sings again in a number of encore performances around the world, aka “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” (to borrow a principle from Carl Sagan). “””””
And of course Carl Sagan was quite wrong; which is not that unusual.
Extra-ordinary claims require no better testing than perfectly ordinary claims. Nemely, both have to survive the crucial test of experimental verification. Was it Einstein who said that only one counter example is necessary to disprove any claim; and he did not separate ordinary claims from extra ordinary claims. Maybe it is the relative difficulty of the experimental tests, that distinguishes ordinary from extra-ordinary. A million positives are trumped by a single negative (verifiable results of course.)

Jim Masterson 2:57pm 23/09/11
Many thanks for correcting me, as a (now retired) research chemist, I should have remembered that the metre was redefined as 1/299,792,458 of the distance travelled by light in 1 second.
Taking that into account my proposition would lead to the conclusion that the standard metre is a fraction too short.

“Only four fundamental physical quantities have exact values. Those a (c), (g), (mu nought) and (epsilon nought); the permeability and permittivity of the vaccuum.”
I would think differently – that c was defined by mu nought and epsilon nought and that the only other fundamental constants are h and G. All of the Plank units can be derived from these. (But, 40 years since physics degreee, and one liquid lunch….)

Dead Dog Bounce: They are comparing the time it took the neutrinos to travel that distance with the time it would take light traveling through a vacuum to travel that distance. (In fact, I think you would be hard-pressed to get any light…visible light anyway…through hundreds of miles of granite.)
I don’t think it would be anything particularly new to observe particles traveling faster through a material than light travels through the same material. What is dramatic is the particles traveling faster than the speed of light in vacuum.
Roger Longstaff says:

I would think differently – that c was defined by mu nought and epsilon nought and that the only other fundamental constants are h and G. All of the Plank units can be derived from these. (But, 40 years since physics degreee, and one liquid lunch….)

No, it is c that is defined to be exactly a certain quantity. It is all a matter of convention at any rate. There are a certain number of units / physical constants that have to be defined and then the rest are derived from what is defined. At one time, it was the meter that was defined and the speed of light that was derived from it but at some point they changed that around so that now c is defined as being exactly and the meter is derived from it using that definition and the definition for the second. Here is a discussion of the current SI system from NIST: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/neutrinos.png

Actually relativity does not say nothing can travel faster than light. It only says that particles cannot be accelerated beyond the speed of light.
This does not preclude the existence of tachyons, objects which travel faster than light and cannot fall below that speed.
Not expert enough in particle physics or the particular experiment but perhaps the neutrinos were produced in the collision with greater than light speed. From this link:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Tachyon.html
“It has been proposed that tachyons could be produced from high-energy particle collisions, and tachyon searches have been undertaken in cosmic rays. Cosmic rays hit the Earth’s atmosphere with high energy (some of them with speed almost 99.99% of the speed of light) making several collisions with the molecules in the atmosphere. The particles made by this collision interact with the air, creating even more particles in a phenomenon known as a cosmic ray shower. In 1973, using a large collection of particle detectors, Philip Crough and Roger Clay identified a putative superluminal particle in an air shower, although this result has never been reproduced. ”
The Wikipedia entry on neutrino has already been updated since reporting on the experiment:
The idea that neutrinos could have a tachyonic nature was proposed as far back as 1985 by Chodos et al.[32][33] Today, the possibility of having standard particles moving at superluminal speeds is a natural consequence of unconventional dispersion relations that appear in the Standard-Model Extension,[34][35][36] a realistic description of the possible violation of Lorentz invariance in field theory. In this framework, neutrinos experience Lorentz-violating oscillations and can travel faster than light at high energies.