There are plans at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory "Fermilab" in Batavia, Illinois, to shoot a beam of neutrinos to a detector 735 kilometers away at the Sawden mine in Minnesota. The researchers hope to report their results within six months
In light of the results of the experiment at CERN that he allegedly showed The muon neutrinos are able to travel faster than light, groups at two particle accelerators in the USA and Japan plan to repeat the experiments carried out at the Opera particle accelerator at the Gran Sesso National Laboratory in Italy.
There are plans at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory "Fermilab" in Batavia, Illinois, to shoot a beam of neutrinos to a detector 735 kilometers away at the Sawden mine in Minnesota. The researchers hope to report their results within six months.
Whereas In Japan, a group of researchers is working on a project called T2K Also plans to shoot neutrinos from the Proton Accelerator Research Complex in Takai 295 kilometers to the Super-Kamiokanda detector at the Kamioka Mine.
Meanwhile a physicist From the Institute for Basic Questions FQXi named Stefan Alexander (who works with the famous Avi Ashtaker) tried his best to explain the neutrino experiment and published theHis partial explanation on the institute's blog.
A glimpse into the physics of the impossible with the help of some elementary principles: quantum mechanics, quantum gravity and a lot of good will...
While recent measurements of muon neutrinos propagating onto Orith from the OPERA experiment need verification by an independent repetition of the experiment, it is still fascinating to imagine whether it is even possible to cook up a toy model to explain the effect of speeding on Orith.
If indeed muonic neutrinos can travel faster than light, we will first need to explain why and how neutrinos can "move outside the light cone" without violating the sacred principles that apply to all other particles that enjoy partisanship. In other words, if neutrinos are given some kind of super-property, why are massless gauging fields like photons or other fermions like electrons and quarks not endowed with such super-light forces? Additionally, since neutrinos are cousins of charged leptons via the weak interactions, shouldn't we expect strange effects in forced transitions?
Some have raised the possibility that it is improbable that neutrinos can travel faster than light because that would contradict the arrival time of light from the 1987 supernova. If we assume that neutrinos were traveling one millionth of the time faster than light, they would have arrived months before the light emitted from the supernova. But the neutrinos from the supernova were much lower in energy than the terrestrial ones observed by OPERA. Also, the distance scales from the supernova were of different orders of magnitude. Finally, maybe the muonic nitrites are at all different from their electronic relatives? Let's assume it's like that and we'll move on to the new model and theory...
And here Alexander rejected the equality between the supernova neutrinos and their Oprah counterparts only to propose a model that bases the Oprah effect on the basis of the following components:
- Opera neutrinos at high energies exceed the speed of light only on short distance scales (Alexander avoided actually choosing this distance scale). Neutrinos propagating at low energies, such as those from the 1987 supernova, therefore do not suffer from this effect on light.
- The muonic neutrinos are "coupled" to space-time in such a way that they are able to move faster than light.
- The superiority of nitrites is related to the fact that nitrites can undergo fluctuations in "flavor" (type). Therefore, all other forms of matter that cannot undergo changes in taste (which is basically anything else) will not have superhuman abilities.
Ideally, we would look for a mechanism that would link these three components; Something that Alexander is not currently defining. And in fact he doesn't know what the mechanism is and maybe you know what it is? If he had known what the mechanism was, he would not have written the post on the institute's blog, but he would have run to tell the guys, that is, he would have quickly written an article on the subject...
Given that wish... he's testing how far he can go with his model. It operates according to the well-known principle of simplicity and therefore remains in four dimensions.
He tries to combine the first element of the super-Oriyas together with a cosmological idea that he proposed with friends See the next article:
The main idea is that, in general, space-time is actually not something continuous, from a quantum space-time in which we introduce uncertainty in the directions of space and time. And this universe is full of radiation, which at low energies spreads at the speed of light, while at high energy (in the early cosmic time), this radiation began to be felt in the granular time space (in a foam-like structure on quantum scales). Then the speed of the bunch of photons deviated from the speed of light.
This effect is not different from what is observed in solid state physics in lattice vibrations - whose quantum particle representation is called a phonon. On distance scales that are larger than the lattice spacing, the angular frequency of the phonon vibration is proportional to the wave vector. The propagation speed of the phonon will increase on scales that are proportional to the lattice spacing.
And here many approaches to quantum gravity - such as loop quantum gravity, causal dynamic triangulation and string theory - point to a granular space-time.
However, it is expected that this knitting of space-time is on the order of the Planck length or perhaps on the millimeter scale. But let's say that in exactly the same way as the super-light motion effect, the neutrinos accelerate because they sense the discrete space-time, and as they spread, their explosion ratios vary coherently by a lattice effect that develops.
We will move on. Alexander suggests: Maybe we can also see such neutrinos that accelerate on cosmological scales? what do you think? In his model we will have to add some suppressing effect that will cancel the effect when the lattice looks smooth and continuous - then we will get back a classic space-time. He doesn't know how to do it and neither do we of course...
And by the way, the big question is whether there is an undefined error in the neutrinos experiment, so that their travel time actually seems artificially short. Chang Ki Young of Stony Brook University in New York, who is working on the Japanese experiment, says that he is betting that the result of the muon neutrino experiment is the result of a systematic error in the complex timing, which is related to the global positioning system, GPS, atomic clocks and electronic masses. "I wouldn't want to bet on my wife and kids because they would go crazy," says Young, "but I bet on my house."
Alexander nevertheless suggests the reader stay with him for a moment just to be safe (perhaps the Japanese and American experiments will by chance show that the neutrino will move slightly faster than the speed of light, and then we have a half-baked theory in hand...).
Now comes the hard part of Alexander's model: why do only neutrinos see the space-time lattice? Why only them... In this case, since the neutrinos are quantum mechanical objects, we have no choice but to turn to quantum mechanics that will save us from all harm.
What is special about nitrites? You know neutrinos have such tiny masses; They are so tiny compared to the other fermions in nature. Is their chirality basically reversed? Perhaps the nitrites are their own antiparticles?
Alexander hypothesizes that maybe only the neutrinos are found to have chiral interactions with gravity (lattice/discrete) and are able to oscillate in a supersonic way into each other, and that could do the trick. Maybe an explanation like this or maybe something else... and if you have another theory, now is the time to propose it before we find out (or don't find out) that there was a mistake in the muonic nitrite experiment...
Following the initial responses, Permilab announced that it would review and review Seren's results. For Permilab, this is an interesting situation because researchers in the US first reported neutrinos on Ureim in 2007. But they also found that these results were an error in measuring the practical speed of the nertins. Physicists at Paralab and Saran are in close cooperation in many particle experiments, but at the same time in continuous scientific competition. Permilab has announced that it will update its 2007 MINOS experiment to test CERN's results in four to six months. The MINOS uses two detectors - one located at Primilab in Batavia and the other, located at the Sudan mine in Minnesota, which is about 735 kilometers from Permilab. The remote detector consists of steel weighing 6000 tons and more than a trillion neutrinos pass through it every year. But only about 1500 of them collide with atoms inside the detector.
MINOS currently employs about 200 scientists from 32 institutes in six countries. To recheck the results of the Opera experiment, Permilab will need four to five people and a more sophisticated GPS system. We also need more accurate atomic clocks and better LEDs to detect the neutrinos stream as they are fired through the MINOS from the origin.
21 תגובות
The axiom that the speed of light is a finite and absolute speed is the error. Light is both a wave and a mass. Therefore the speed of light is slightly lower than the final absolute speed by a tiny delta difference. The neutrino has no mass (mass -0-) and therefore can move at a higher speed.
The experiment conducted is not wrong. Just forget that the "speed of light" is lower than the maximum speed in the cosmos.
A normalization attempt and consideration of the movement of the earth in the expansion of the cosmos also gave correct results. And I bet that the new experiments and calculations will prove that the results of the experiment are correct. And there is no breaking of the laws of physics here.
Einstein's assertion that the speed of light cannot be exceeded is based on a mathematical error.
Read here:
http://www.relativitychallenge.com/archives/category/mistakes
A few words thanks to a mistake.
If you're going to exceed the speed of light - then go big! 10C, 2C, something serious. What is a fraction of a percent?
Really smells like a mistake.
High words but still in all the experiments (three as far as I understood) the result was in favor of a speed higher than the speed of light.
So how many more experiments are needed to confirm the result statistically?
I think they will find that there is a mistake.
Here is where I think and knowing how much more will be the source of the error.
In Sarn and Gern Sesmu placed completely identical GPS receivers and also identical atomic clocks. I wrote it in the article - that the experiment is based on GPS and atomic clocks. The Swiss Institute of Meteorology calibrated both systems, one in Gran Sasso and the other in Sarn. and verified the calibration by the German Meteorological Institute.
Use components for temporary adjustment (lasers, optical fibers, satellites, etc.). A time difference was measured between the GPS receiver in Sarn and the one in Oprah, approximately on the order of 3 nanoseconds, and they took this correction when connecting the times.
You know that relationships have reference systems. Here in the experiment there are two reference systems: that of Sarn and that of Gran Sasso. The researchers looked at the coordinates of the electron beam in relation to its reference system they called a global geodetic reference system.
And this is relative to the GPS markings in Sarn and Gran Sasso. And they marked along the way with a GPS and a GPS. And don't forget that there are external GPS and satellites...
And again an analysis was performed at different times using geodynamic models and then compared the measurements at the same time by taking measurements in the same reference system. and found that both methods produced the same result. Calculate the impedance between the different timing systems in Sarn and Opera and the possible errors in the calibration.
The travel time of the neutrinos beam from a axis - if we assume the speed of light - is calculated in relation to the reference system of the Oprah detector. And so once again the time of the event's impact must be corrected due to the relationship between the time systems between Saran and Oprah.
Of course, the researchers took into account 16,000 measurements and performed statistical models to compare.
In short, the problem here is the GPS system and the atomic clocks and the calibration between them. and especially the coordination between the reference systems. It seems very complicated to me and since it is on the order of magnitude of nanoseconds (the order of magnitude of the statistical error and uncertainty) both in Milla and in 16,000 measurements, it seems that a more sophisticated timing system and better calibration would give results closer to the speed of light.
It could also be possible, I mean that there is also a possibility, it is possible that theoretically, there is a probability that there is no mistake, and no one fell asleep, nor drank, nor the branch, nor smoked. Simply, neutrinos travel faster than light.
It is bad enough, from a relativistic point of view, if particles with mass even managed to reach the speed of light.
Arya, it seems to me that it is quite unlikely that they were wrong about such "simple" things (for them these are simple and trivial things, since they have been used to sending particles according to the earth for decades).
It is more likely that this is a simple measurement error.
It is also possible that when the neutrino changes flavor it performs some spatial quantum jump. In the long run, the average of the jumps is 0, so the neutrino from the supernova arrives almost together with the photons.
Read this article. Already in 1986, three researchers asked whether it was possible for the muon neutrino to travel at a speed higher than that of light:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370269386904806
Here is the abstract:
Some papers have appeared recently which are noticeable since they call attention to interesting experimental results referring to the old-dated question whether neutrinos are superluminal (or not). They are therefore complemented, from the theoretical point of view, and some experimental predictions are added that could be tested, especially in connection with neutrino oscillations.
Paramilab comes to life again...
I read the apparently most convincing explanation so far (excluding the possibility of an error in the measurement) on the Rotter website. One of the surfers brought up the possibility that the physical absolute "speed of light" is slightly higher, and it is the light itself that actually slows down a little.
How come the Chinese don't have their own particle accelerator yet?
After all, Tsaran will continue to work for perhaps another 10 years and then close down following the economic collapse of Europe and the rise of the Republicans (the great scientists ;~) in the USA.
It is only reasonable that the Chinese are now starting to build one of their own. And if not, then soon they will start.
Prediction: After they close Tzarn, the Chinese will take all the researchers and build everything anew and better, only without free distribution of knowledge to the rest of the world.
I compare the house and a car, which is a measurement error, although maybe somewhere it makes sense that the theory of relativity simply does not work in the above orders of magnitude (the short distance, the zero mass, the high energy, etc.)
Why do they shoot the beam to such short distances that obviously increase the chance of making a mistake in the measurement? Is it not possible to shoot it, for example, from one side of the earth to the other? That is, shoot it vertically downwards, and try to receive it on the other side of the earth? After all, these are particles that pass through the earth without difficulty.
jelly
Mathematics is not insurance against misinterpretation even if it is very complex
And if there is an interpretation, here is another one:
It is possible that this is the result of a self-entanglement phenomenon of the neutrino.
Perhaps by being massless and almost completely neutral to interactions. Notirano weaves itself in spacetime.
And it may be related to its ability to change during its movement.
So the appearance of his neutrino before time is due to the spontaneous appearance of a neutrino ghost particle entangled in its propagation path.
lion:
These thoughts crossed my mind immediately upon the first publication of the discovery, but according to the (rough) calculations I made, the changes in distance resulting from the movement of the earth cannot explain more than 20% of the difference between the observed speed and the speed of light.
Alexander enlists in his proposal the highest physics available (including questionable theories such as the cosmic foam, granular Zemo space and more). Of course, there may also be a measurement error. Such things happen in research.
However, they may not have taken into account something almost trivial like the summation of relative velocities and my intention to three phenomena:
1. The Earth rotates on its axis and the two laboratories are at different latitudes and move at different speeds.
2. If at the moment of the experiment the two laboratories were at a different distance from the sun, then their orbital speed is also different.
3. Also, it must be taken into account if the beam is shot with the rotation of the earth or in the opposite direction.
Of course, I didn't check if there was anything in it, but when dealing with relative speeds and time differences of nanoseconds, you have to think in this direction as well.
It really sounds sci-fi and futuristic. Right. But it is based on science and mathematical models…
Here are the links to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation
And here is another summary:
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/QTG/qtg160.html
Holes in space time, gravitational loops….
I think I once read about it in some story from DAB when I was a kid.
know it 🙂
In Israel, in the era of the housing protest... it is better for you not to interfere with the house. First, the bank will immediately complain about the mortgage. And secondly, if you happen to lose the house, the rental prices are expensive and it's a shame just because of some neutrino to pay expensive rent all your life... 🙂
It is possible that neutrinos emitted from the supernova did reach the earth months before the light itself, but because of their name - neutrinos - they do not interact with matter, and therefore we cannot know about their existence.
jelly
In a few months they will be able to use the Galaxy S3 device to perform the task, it has all the components you mentioned.
And on a serious note - I would also bet my house that this is a measurement error, but I'm afraid of losing it.
Science moves faster than the speed of light! 🙂
So the explanation to the readers: following the initial reactions, Paramilab announced that it will test and review Saran's results. For Permilab, this is an interesting situation because researchers in the US first reported neutrinos on Ureim in 2007. But they also discovered that these results were an error in measuring the actual speed of the nertins - an error within the error limits of the experiment. The physicists at Paralab will update the 2007 experiment and refine it with more data and more sophisticated instrumentation.
Physicists at Paralab and Saran are in close cooperation in many particle experiments, but at the same time in continuous scientific competition.
Permilab has announced that it will update its 2007 MINOS experiment to test CERN's results in four to six months. The MINOS uses two detectors - one located at Primilab in Batavia and the other, located at the Sudan mine in Minnesota, which is about 735 kilometers from Permilab. The remote detector consists of steel weighing 6000 tons and more than a trillion neutrinos pass through it every year. But only about 1500 of them collide with atoms inside the detector.
MINOS currently employs about 200 scientists from 32 institutes in six countries. To recheck the results of the Opera experiment, Permilab will need four to five people and a more sophisticated GPS system. We also need more accurate atomic clocks and better LEDs to detect the neutrinos stream as they are fired through the MINOS from the origin.