[Closed] subatomic particles exceed lightspeed.

Can never really be sure about hawking's pronouncement. It was found recently thatbhalf his communications were in fact interference picked up from radio cabs.

i do wonder how you can measure the speed of such particles, you are entering the realm of quantum physics and to be fair things get a bit odd. i.e. location isn't definite and things become probabilities rather than definites.

The obvious reason is it ain't correct. Something wrong with the measurements. But I hope it's true cause it makes the universe a bit weirder.

i do wonder how you can measure the speed of such particles, you are entering the realm of quantum physics and to be fair things get a bit odd. i.e. location isn't definite and things become probabilities rather than definites.

lets hope chaos theory intervenes and you get Heisenberg when you ring.

I'm fairly sure the distance between Cern and Gran Sasso isn't what would usually be considered on the quantum scale 😉

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/oi-physicists

The obvious reason is it ain't correct. Something wrong with the measurements. But I hope it's true cause it makes the universe a bit weirder.

Wouldn't feel that way if you were a physics student.

@charliemungus .....nice, lets abuse someone with a disability shall we 🙄

does this mean the delorean isn't dead?

I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere about the report being created in Quark Xpress...
...maybe not then.

Strictly speaking, it's the speed of light in a vacuum that is the absolute; the speed of light decreases in anything other than a vacuum (the origin of diffraction effects at air/water interface) and in fact Cerenkov radiation (the blue glow (NOT green!) arising from used nuclear fuel stored under water) arises from high energy beta-particles (electrons) exceeding the local speed of light (ie. in water not vacuum).

It is likely that there is a systematic basis for the apparent observed neutrino behaviour in this case; if Einstein's General Relativity is proven not to apply in this instance it will be a significant revelation. Having said that, there is a long running breakdown between general relativity and quantum mechanics which has yet to be explained (string/membrane theory attempts, but is very hard to substantiate in any meaningful sense) and the greatest strength of the scientific method is that any theory can be proved incorrect...

CountZero 😀 😯 ❓

all just theory innit.

god moves in mysterious ways. very quickly.

;o)

[i]god moves in mysterious ways. very quickly.[/i]

I wonder if he moves at all or whether he just reimagines the universe so that it's in a different place relative to him?

There's a nice analysis of the findings [url= http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/09/22/faster-than-light-travel-discovered-slow-down-folks/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+DiscoverMag+%28Discover+Magazine%29 ]here[/url].

So, am I going to be able to make the Kessel run in 12 parsecs or not ❓

Given that a parsec is a measure of distance and not time, I think we can safely conclude that, er, Han Solo was full of shit.

But surely a Parsec is a measure of distance, not time? 😉

Edit: Damn you Cougar

as far as i know they are saying within the loop it appears it went +speed of light but as they are scientists they are saying just that."appears"
until someone atually replicates the same thing with diff equipment it is an anomaly(sp) and they are happy with that

much the same as they found that particles could transportate(sp)(like the fly) a few years ago.

Cougar - Member
Given that a parsec is a measure of distance and not time, I think we can safely conclude that, er, Han Solo was full of shit.

ah yes, you are truly wise in the ways of family guy.
as anyone knows family guy quotes can usually end any argument.
does that make me a double negative?

I thought they were looking at neutrinos, which are effing hard to see in the first place. How did they know the neutrinos they set off at site A are the same ones they find at site B?

The sun is throwing gazillions of the things through us every second. It must be hard to do this kind of thing.

I'm going to lie down now. My head hurts.

Edit: Damn you Cougar

[img] [/img]

How did they know the neutrinos they set off at site A are the same ones they find at site B?

They fasten tiny little rings around their legs.

Pook - Member
all just theory innit

"Just"?

why should I care about this?

Is it more important than the fact that my hair is all over the place AGAIN! 😆

tazzymtb - Member
@charliemungus .....nice, lets abuse someone with a disability shall we

POSTED 16 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

You're right, we should treat them differently if they are disabled.

I think that Italy and Switzerland are in different time zones and the scientists forgot to factor that in.

I do hope that Einstein and his theory turns out to be incorrect. There would be a certain beauty and symmetry in that for me.

I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere about the report being created in Quark Xpress...
...maybe not then.

is it funny? relatively.

Pretty certain that I once read about a pair of particles. Might have been electrons that had interacted together and then went on their merry own ways.
messing with one of them caused an instantaneous corresponding change to the other. implying faster than light something or other.

##The odds are I may have been chemically challenged at the time of reading. It was that time of life. This therefore , may be untrue, made up or a figment of my imagination##

Aren't Neutrinos like electrons i.e. of miniscule mass, but having no charge? Their position is somewhat nebulous at the best of times. How do you "fire" something that barely interacts with the rest of matter? Or detect it's arrival somewhere?

The barman says “Sorry, we don’t serve sub-atomic particles here.”

A neutrino walks into a bar.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0106tjc/In_Our_Time_The_Neutrino/

in our time on the neutrino. programme like this are worth the license fee alone