jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (7 posts)

Neutrinos Part 2

  1. emrldphx profile image60
    emrldphxposted 4 years ago


    Researches have re-run the neutrino tests trying to eliminate one of the possible explanations for their previous findings that neutrinos apparently travel faster than light.

    The test was run again using much shorter pulses of neutrinos. The initial tests had pulses that lasted 10 millionths of a second, and the discrepancy was approximately 60 nanoseconds. However, 10 millionths of a second is is 160 times longer than the 60 nanosecond discrepancy, and they were using averages. This time they ran the test with pulses that are only 3 billionths of a second long, or 3 nanoseconds.

    The findings were similar. Neutrinos still appear to be travelling slightly faster than the speed of light.

  2. emrldphx profile image60
    emrldphxposted 4 years ago

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2011/1 … ngs.-Video

    One example of a team of scientists refuting the Faster-than-light(FTL) findings.

    Personally, I have a problem with them saying things like 'the neutrinos should have lost energy if they were travelling faster than light', when we have 0 mathematical basis for what would happen if something traveled FTL.

    Pretty exciting stuff. Unfortunately, it will probably take at least a year before we have the beginnings of solid evidence either way... this stuff takes time.

  3. Pcunix profile image90
    Pcunixposted 4 years ago

    It is pretty silly to say that something should act like this if it does something our present theory says can't happen.

  4. IzzyM profile image86
    IzzyMposted 4 years ago

    Judging from what I have read on neutrinos so far, if those experiments prove to be flawless, then the whole modern day foundation of Physics which embraces Einstein's theory of relativity is swept away, and scientists have a whole of re-writing to do.

    Beam me up, Mr Spock!

    Ps edited because my first comment showed my ignorance too much.

    1. emrldphx profile image60
      emrldphxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Well, we don't actually know if it would directly refute relativity. Relativity states that the amount of energy needed to accelerate a particle to the speed of light is infinite, so it can't be done. We can get really, really close, but never there.

      So far, it seems to be very, very true. The amount of energy required to go from 99.99% of the speed of light to 99.999% of the speed of light is tremendous, not a small fraction as we would assume.

      One explanation I found is that perhaps they aren't accelerating to that speed, but somehow transitioning to that speed. Imagine getting in a spaceship and starting to go a million miles an hour with no acceleration(no being pressed into the back of your seat).

      Who knows though.

      1. IzzyM profile image86
        IzzyMposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for responding, you sound like you know what you are talking about.
        I am fascinated and watch the story with interest.

        Those neutrinos travelled uninterrupted through rock? Even light can't do that!

        1. emrldphx profile image60
          emrldphxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I can't do the math for this kind of stuff, but I have a fairly strong grasp of the concepts.

          As far as I understand, 2 neutrinos could travel through lead for trillions of kilometers before one of them collided with something. Very, very small.