OPERA experiment


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : OPERA experiment

Author Message
Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3661
Credit: 369,112
RAC: 216
Italy
Message 1198704 - Posted: 23 Feb 2012, 4:03:04 UTC

It looks like the 60 ns anomaly in the time of flight of neutrinos from CERN to Gran Sasso was due to a faulty fiber optics cable. An official announcement is expected today.
Tullio
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1198810 - Posted: 23 Feb 2012, 15:16:05 UTC - in response to Message 1198704.

they said they found 2 problems. One which would have made the time slow and the other which would have speeded the time up. Now I'm more than a bit curious as to the fix and retesting.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3661
Credit: 369,112
RAC: 216
Italy
Message 1198814 - Posted: 23 Feb 2012, 15:26:31 UTC - in response to Message 1198704.

Yes, they will retest in May.
____________

JLConawayII
Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 02
Posts: 186
Credit: 2,762,491
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1206007 - Posted: 15 Mar 2012, 2:39:05 UTC

Of course it was flawed. Everyone knew that almost immediately. This is why it's so important to properly review and confirm new information before going public with it, you don't need to get people all excited over nothing. It makes the entire scientific community look foolish.

One of the most basic tenets of science is reproducibility. That means this result should be able to be produced again and again, preferably NOT on the same (apparently broken) equipment. Did they do this? Well they reproduced it, but they used the exact same equipment, in the exact same configuration. It stands to reason that they're probably going to get the same bogus result. Now if someone can actually corroborate these results and produce superluminal neutrinos, that's a whole different story. As it stands this is just another case of scientists seeking their 15 minutes of fame.
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1206014 - Posted: 15 Mar 2012, 3:07:42 UTC - in response to Message 1206007.

I wouldn't say people were getting excited. the reason for going public with the info was to ask for help figuring out exactly what was happening and where the flaws may occur. A good scientist will ask others for help. bad ones make up a story and stick with it even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

JLConawayII
Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 02
Posts: 186
Credit: 2,762,491
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1206018 - Posted: 15 Mar 2012, 3:19:16 UTC - in response to Message 1206014.
Last modified: 15 Mar 2012, 3:39:03 UTC

I wouldn't say people were getting excited. the reason for going public with the info was to ask for help figuring out exactly what was happening and where the flaws may occur. A good scientist will ask others for help. bad ones make up a story and stick with it even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary



Yeah, people were fairly excited over it. I caught a blog on PhysicsWorld I think talking about some group that actually wrote it into a song. Here's a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpMY84T8WY0 >:oP There were plenty of people at work talking about it, and what it meant to physics. To say the least the situation could have been handled more responsibly. If anything good came out of it, it's that it made people think critically about what we know, and what the flaws in our current fomulation of the laws of physics might be. I just hope the inevitable revelation that the experiment was probably in error doesn't put a damper on that.
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1206100 - Posted: 15 Mar 2012, 12:12:09 UTC - in response to Message 1206018.

a blog doesn't equate to scientists. I was interested and I also paid attention. They didn't point a finger and declare with absolute certainty that they had done it. Their report was more of, "we got a result, it repeats, but we aren't sure why." which is far from a definitive result. I cannot control what bloggers and non scientist alike get excited about. I found it interesting and like the scientists wanted others to attempt a replication of the test or at least provide a reason for the seemingly impossible result
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

musicplayer
Send message
Joined: 17 May 10
Posts: 1431
Credit: 687,186
RAC: 3
Message 1206202 - Posted: 15 Mar 2012, 17:20:06 UTC
Last modified: 15 Mar 2012, 17:22:30 UTC

Are scientists ever supposed to be successful in what they are doing?

Remember about all the fuzz about so-called cold fusion?

In the end they were never able to conclude successfully that the principles regarding the physical principles behind the use of cold-fusion may actually have been working.

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3661
Credit: 369,112
RAC: 216
Italy
Message 1206631 - Posted: 16 Mar 2012, 16:32:29 UTC
Last modified: 16 Mar 2012, 16:33:10 UTC

The ICARUS experiment led by Carlo Rubbia has confirmed that neutrinos do not travel faster than light. Rubbia was always dubious about the OPERA result.
Tullio
____________

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4824
Credit: 80,922,273
RAC: 37,936
United States
Message 1206699 - Posted: 16 Mar 2012, 20:57:57 UTC

Neutrinos may not travel faster than light, but this is a bit interesting.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/03/16/message-encoded-in-neutrino-beam-transmitted-through-solid-rock/?WT_mc_id=SA_CAT_physics_20120316

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9219
Credit: 1,408,579
RAC: 1,690
United States
Message 1206719 - Posted: 16 Mar 2012, 22:20:26 UTC - in response to Message 1206007.

Of course it was flawed. Everyone knew that almost immediately. This is why it's so important to properly review and confirm new information before going public with it, you don't need to get people all excited over nothing. It makes the entire scientific community look foolish.

One of the most basic tenets of science is reproducibility. That means this result should be able to be produced again and again, preferably NOT on the same (apparently broken) equipment. Did they do this? Well they reproduced it, but they used the exact same equipment, in the exact same configuration. It stands to reason that they're probably going to get the same bogus result. Now if someone can actually corroborate these results and produce superluminal neutrinos, that's a whole different story. As it stands this is just another case of scientists seeking their 15 minutes of fame.


I think skildude responded well, but you do not seem to agree, and so I ask, how are scientists supposed to reproduce something they do not even know about it, because possible findings were not made public, hmmm? Catch 22. I am much more worried about criminal cases being discussed so much in the media and convictions (or failures to convict) in the court of public opinion that take place long before the actual trail even takes place!

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4824
Credit: 80,922,273
RAC: 37,936
United States
Message 1206820 - Posted: 17 Mar 2012, 2:26:40 UTC

Tullio is still correct.
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/16/more-evidence-that-einstein-was-right-about-light-speed/?hpt=hp_c2

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3661
Credit: 369,112
RAC: 216
Italy
Message 1206867 - Posted: 17 Mar 2012, 6:33:58 UTC

I have personally known Carlo Rubbia while at Trieste Area Science Park and know he is a very demanding person. He was building the Elettra Synchrotron accelerator as an X-ray source at nearby Basovizza on the Carso highland and when the UPS failed one hot summer Friday afternoon and all Area people but him and me had gone swimming, I had to explain what had happened. He wasn't happy having lost his terminal as all systems had failed.
Tullio
____________

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31430
Credit: 12,112,383
RAC: 27,848
United Kingdom
Message 1206974 - Posted: 17 Mar 2012, 15:10:17 UTC

I agree with Einstein that light travels at a specific maximum speed, due to photons in a vacuum. I still think that other "things" can travel faster than light. This business of mass becomes infinite is clouding the issue. Of course I have no evidence one way or the other whatsoever, nor has anybody else.

Just sticking a marker in the sand so you can all walk over it! :-))

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1207095 - Posted: 17 Mar 2012, 17:51:42 UTC - in response to Message 1206699.

Neutrinos may not travel faster than light, but this is a bit interesting.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/03/16/message-encoded-in-neutrino-beam-transmitted-through-solid-rock/?WT_mc_id=SA_CAT_physics_20120316

Steve
I'm betting the NSA or military will want to start using this to commjunicate with ships at sea. Knowing a ships location you could beam a message from Washington DC directly to the ship. Messages could be encoded but it would be unnecessary because the neutrinos wouldnt be detected unless someone setup a detector system between the ships and sender or beyond the ships themselves. either way the message would be unlikely to be detected by anyone other than the expected receiver.

Can I sign up for a patent on this right now!!!

____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

musicplayer
Send message
Joined: 17 May 10
Posts: 1431
Credit: 687,186
RAC: 3
Message 1207279 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 0:30:56 UTC
Last modified: 18 Mar 2012, 0:37:00 UTC

Is the speed of light assumed to be a constant?

How about the notion about time then? We know that strong gravitational fields is slowing time down.

Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 "only" is trying to relate matter to the corresponding energy it represents, but what about a possible equation which relates time to the speed of light?

Is time something which is having a definition at all?

The second paragraph may imply that gravity and time is relating to each other.

But any equation (I guess an equation neeeds constants, not variables) for this I really do not know about.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31430
Credit: 12,112,383
RAC: 27,848
United Kingdom
Message 1207414 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 11:14:01 UTC

Is time something which is having a definition at all?


Time is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects. The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is continually changing; events happen, then are located further and further in the past. Time has been a major subject of religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a non-controversial manner applicable to all fields of study has consistently eluded the greatest scholars. A simple definition states that "time is what clocks measure".


International second

Since 1967 the second has been defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. In 1997 CIPM added that the periods would be defined for a caesium atom at rest, and approaching the theoretical temperature of absolute zero, and in 1999, it included corrections from ambient radiation.

This definition refers to a caesium atom at rest at a temperature of 0 K (absolute zero). Absolute zero implies no movement, and therefore zero external radiation effects (i.e., zero local electric and magnetic fields).


Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : OPERA experiment

Copyright © 2014 University of California