next »

[Data]

Just watched the faster than light speed video, all the ifs and buts and maybes, I want to know the answer now 

Still a good program that gets you thinking, thanks for posting Freddy.

[Freddy]

You are welcome.  I like Marcus du Sautoy, he did an interesting program with Alan Davies (the comedian) a while back themed around 'how long is a piece of string' - a lot more complicated than you think. They also went into string theory which was very interesting.  *He also did a program on parallel dimensions too, all very interesting and well explained*.

The BBC was quick to put this one together I thought.

*My mistake, I think that was Brian Cox.

[Diesel]

What an interesting programme, as Data said, no answers really. It seems to me that the Scientific/Physics academia really wish that this would go away, or, indeed, had not been made public, as it interferes with their cosy life.

For the past ninety odd years an accepted standard has been used and is the bases for many investigative projects, funded in the usual way. These finding could throw a serious spanner in the works essentially making the findings of these projects, factual or otherwise, incorrect.

Is it possible that there are particles that, due to inadequate detection equipment, travel faster than light and have not yet been detected ?. Currently, who knows.

To me, in my simplistic world, this smacks again of man's arrogance, we make the rules and they can't be broken.

I think, as a race, we are in for some pretty serious wake-up calls in the future as we are not as clever as we think we are.

BTW academia, best of luck with your next funding application.

[Freddy]

Yes, it's kind of like when they say something like 'this dinosaur was the largest thing to have ever lived' and then they forget to add '...that has so far been discovered'.

Our trouble I agree is that once we think we know something then it has to be right.  Not so.

Anyway, I will have to watch that again...did I understand correctly that mathematics does actually allow for things that travel faster than the speed of light ?

[Snowcrash]

Physics, as we understand it now, does not allow anything sub-light, with mass, to travel at or above the speed of light.
Anything travelling at the speed of light (like light) is detectable and is the basis of all our technology to this point.
If there was anything travelling faster than light (tachyons, very tachy  ) it would be very difficult for us to detect due to we use light to detect things.
If a particle is created travelling faster than light (this appears to be allowed) it would not be able to slow down below the speed of light. Though the book is still out on this one.

An anti electron (positron) is mathamatically identical to a regular electron travelling backwards through time. But what is really real?

With respect to physics, everything not forbidden is compulsory. (Gell-Mann borrowed from T.H. White)

[Snowcrash]

After a flurry of papers the team at Gran Sasso are going to re-do the experiment in a different way to see if they're right or not.

Watch this space.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15471118

[Snowcrash]

This is still rumour but it looks like the timing could be down to a dodgy fibre optic cable.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/02/22/unconfirmed-rumor-ftl-neutrinos-may-be-due-to-a-faulty-gps-connection/

Will keep looking.

[DD1975]

It a conspiricy I tells ya, them that's in the know don't want to share 

[Carl2]

  I always wondered why the speed of light was limited, I learned the speed of light is specified as being whatever was measured in a vacum.  When Light hits the earths atmosphere it slows down.  Light travels at different speeds in air than it would in glass or clear plastics which is why prisms and lens work.
  Interesting find.
Carl2

[Snowcrash]

I feel this neutrino story is now put to bed with a whimper.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17364682

It seems the cosmic speed limit still stands, for now.

[DaveMorton]

I'd imagine that the poor bastage who's job it was to maintain the equipment that caused all this furor back in September has either died of embarrassment, or is looking for a new career. I also think that whoever decided to publish the original findings probably feels pretty stupid by now, too.

[Today]

Google visited last this page Today at 00:04:41