Goodnite Posted February 23, 2012 #1 Share Posted February 23, 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/faulty-wire-error-blamed-faster-light-particles-233455932.html Scientists who last year found particles that appeared to break the Universe's speed limit are looking at two technical issues that could have skewed the controversial finding, CERN said on Thursday. The European Centre for Nuclear Research (CERN) confirmed a report by the US journal Science on Wednesday that the team were verifying a cable connection. "It may have caused a slight discrepancy (in the results), and they are checking to see if this is the case," CERN press officer Arnaud Marsollier told AFP by phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarMountainKid Posted February 23, 2012 #2 Share Posted February 23, 2012 It's the old saying when something doesn't work, the first question to ask is, is it plugged in? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bison Posted February 23, 2012 #3 Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) The news media now have the following information. The fault discovered appears to explain the faster-than-light results as an error. The CERN scientists had previously claimed that all equipment had been checked and a technical error ruled out. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9100009/Scientists-did-not-break-speed-of-light-it-was-a-faulty-wire.html Edited February 23, 2012 by bison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodnite Posted February 23, 2012 Author #4 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I'm not a atomic particle scientist, but anything faster than light would blow up Eienstien's theory, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldorado Posted February 23, 2012 #5 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Red faces all round. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 23, 2012 #6 Share Posted February 23, 2012 And without malicious glee: Told you so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted February 24, 2012 #7 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I'm not a atomic particle scientist, but anything faster than light would blow up Eienstien's theory, correct? Not necessarily. Only if it was faster than light in the universe as we currently know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 24, 2012 #8 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I'm not a atomic particle scientist, but anything faster than light would blow up Eienstien's theory, correct? Some things can appear now to be moving past the speed of light, it depends on where you are standing. If you are on earth, and you watch two spaceships rocket away at say 99% of the speed of light, they both seem to be moving away from you at 99% the speed of light but go outwards, and then turn toward each other, now imagine you are on one of these ships observing the other ship as it gets closer to the ship that you are standing on, it's speed it 99% of c, so is yours, what velocity would you register as it hurtles closer to you? Because you are moving toward it at 99% of c, the other ship would appear to be moving at almost twice the speed of light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted February 24, 2012 #9 Share Posted February 24, 2012 It's the old saying when something doesn't work, the first question to ask is, is it plugged in? lol Steps to troubleshoot $100 gaming system when it gives odd results: 1. Clean gaming disc 2. Check all cables Steps to troubleshoot Billion dollar FTL testing laser: 1.Clean the laser 2. Check all cables. Hmmmm. Oopsie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted February 24, 2012 #10 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I'm not a atomic particle scientist, but anything faster than light would blow up Eienstien's theory, correct? No. Science works in stages. Newtonian physics works fine for the observable universe, and the scales and speeds we experience. At huge speeds and masses, we need Einstein's theories to explain what happens - this doesn't mean that Newton's work is invalid. Likewise, with the tiny scales and huge velocities experienced in these sorts of experiements, Einstein's theories break down, and fail to account for what happens. New theories like quantum physics emerge. But remember - neither Newton's nor Einstein's discoveries are invalid - just not suitable to explain phenomena on that level. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted February 24, 2012 #11 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Very well put, Emma. Without knowing the full details, I can't help wondering how the heck this error wasn't picked up in the calibration tests of the equipment, particularly given the repeat experiment that was done. I think someone needs a rap over the knuckles and a quick refresher on the basics of the 'Scientific Method'.. I *hope* I am being needlessly harsh and there's a really good reason why this happened... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatBeliever Posted February 24, 2012 #12 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I really don see anything faster than the speed of light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamor Posted February 24, 2012 #13 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I'm not a atomic particle scientist, but anything faster than light would blow up Eienstien's theory, correct? The particle can take a shortcut through another dimension and be ahead of the light even though it isn't travelling at higher speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodnite Posted February 24, 2012 Author #14 Share Posted February 24, 2012 All very interesting answers. I'm so glad for all the help. Geez these thoughts just boggle the mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 24, 2012 #15 Share Posted February 24, 2012 The particle can take a shortcut through another dimension and be ahead of the light even though it isn't travelling at higher speed. And the answer if that is possible is forthcoming at some point this year, at least that is what the physicists tell us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmpleFyre Posted February 24, 2012 #16 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I really don see anything faster than the speed of light It took a moment for it to click, and I don't know if it was intended as such.. But that was really funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandOfAmber Posted February 24, 2012 #17 Share Posted February 24, 2012 @ DaGreatBeliever - You wouldn't, naturally, as your eyes are merely photon receptors that deliver signals to your brain... - Brand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamor Posted February 24, 2012 #18 Share Posted February 24, 2012 And the answer if that is possible is forthcoming at some point this year, at least that is what the physicists tell us. True, thank you! Not sure if it is my browser but meant to edit my post since it sounded as a statement of fact rather than the theory it is, but wasn't any edit button. Zam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedOctober Posted February 24, 2012 #19 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Some things can appear now to be moving past the speed of light, it depends on where you are standing. If you are on earth, and you watch two spaceships rocket away at say 99% of the speed of light, they both seem to be moving away from you at 99% the speed of light but go outwards, and then turn toward each other, now imagine you are on one of these ships observing the other ship as it gets closer to the ship that you are standing on, it's speed it 99% of c, so is yours, what velocity would you register as it hurtles closer to you? Because you are moving toward it at 99% of c, the other ship would appear to be moving at almost twice the speed of light. No, in this case, they would each witness each other moving towards each other only at 99% of the speed of light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjadude Posted February 24, 2012 #20 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Steps to troubleshoot $100 gaming system when it gives odd results: 1. Clean gaming disc 2. Check all cables Steps to troubleshoot Billion dollar FTL testing laser: 1.Clean the laser 2. Check all cables. Hmmmm. Oopsie. Yeah, except there are zillions of miles of cables to check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted February 24, 2012 #21 Share Posted February 24, 2012 A cable? Pffft! They obviously just didn't turn their computers off and on again... Damn Windows updates! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted February 24, 2012 #22 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Yeah, except there are zillions of miles of cables to check. All the more reason to check... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted February 24, 2012 #23 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Some things can appear now to be moving past the speed of light, it depends on where you are standing. If you are on earth, and you watch two spaceships rocket away at say 99% of the speed of light, they both seem to be moving away from you at 99% the speed of light but go outwards, and then turn toward each other, now imagine you are on one of these ships observing the other ship as it gets closer to the ship that you are standing on, it's speed it 99% of c, so is yours, what velocity would you register as it hurtles closer to you? Because you are moving toward it at 99% of c, the other ship would appear to be moving at almost twice the speed of light. no it wouldn't The speed of light is the same for all observers , regardless of their motion or the motion of the source of light. Therefore you would observe the incoming spaceship as at the speed of light , not twice the speed of light ( sorry ninety nine per cent ) Special Relativity. There is one thing moving faster than the speed of light anyone know ?????? I recommend reading an experiment called the Morley Michelson or Nickelson or something like that , An outside observer could measure the speed of one object as just below light speed, and measure the other as being just below light speed and assume that when they met, they would meet at almost twice light speed, however this assumption would be wrong, as it assumes that total speed is simply an arithmetic addition of both object's speeds. This assumption is based on day to day experience where speeds are vastly less than that of light, and at such low speeds the arithmetic addition of speeds is accurate. But to assume that you can still simply add speeds up to that of light is not a valid assumption, as proven by relativity Edited February 24, 2012 by danydandan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kludge808 Posted February 25, 2012 #24 Share Posted February 25, 2012 There is one thing moving faster than the speed of light anyone know ?????? The speed at which my former employers pointed fingers when something went wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted February 25, 2012 #25 Share Posted February 25, 2012 The speed at which my former employers pointed fingers when something went wrong. then there are two things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now