Einstein was wrong? Subatomic particles move faster than light?

[Roy H.]

A pillar of physics - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - appears to be smashed by an oddball subatomic particle that has apparently made a giant end run around Albert Einstein's theories.

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab said Thursday they have clocked neutrinos traveling faster than light. That's something that according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity - the famous E (equals) mc2 equation - just doesn't happen.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research. The organization, known as CERN, hosted part of the experiment, which is unrelated to the massive $10 billion Large Hadron Collider also located at the site.

Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

"They are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they've done and really scrutinize it in great detail, and ideally for someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements," he said Thursday.

Scientists at the competing Fermilab in Chicago have promised to start such work immediately.

"It's a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva. "It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true."

Link

That's pretty crazy if true.  Again, if true, it proves once again that just because there's a scientific consensus about something, it doesn't necessarily mean it's proven.

[fairweatherfan]

Interesting - my physics knowledge is very weak, but I wonder if this could help explain dark energy - the "missing" mass-energy that's currently held to make up most of the universe.  If particles can exceed light-speed this may account for some of that gap.  Or not.  Like I said, pretty fuzzy on this though I think it's fascinating.

[angryguy77]

I knew it

This is very interesting. I wonder what the ramifications of this discovery will be.

[Fan from VT]

A pillar of physics - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - appears to be smashed by an oddball subatomic particle that has apparently made a giant end run around Albert Einstein's theories.

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab said Thursday they have clocked neutrinos traveling faster than light. That's something that according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity - the famous E (equals) mc2 equation - just doesn't happen.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research. The organization, known as CERN, hosted part of the experiment, which is unrelated to the massive $10 billion Large Hadron Collider also located at the site.

Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

"They are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they've done and really scrutinize it in great detail, and ideally for someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements," he said Thursday.

Scientists at the competing Fermilab in Chicago have promised to start such work immediately.

"It's a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva. "It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true."

Link

That's pretty crazy if true.  Again, if true, it proves once again that just because there's a scientific consensus about something, it doesn't necessarily mean it's proven.

True, and should always be kept in mind. However, what is MORE inappropriate would be to use this line of thinking to just invalidate all consensus conclusions one doesn't like. This may  prove to be true, which will be interesting, and will certainly change many things; however, it will clearly not change the ways in which speed of light laws are currently successfully used, much like how Einstein's "debunking" of Newtonian physics  didn't suddenly cause mechanics based on Newtonian physics that worked to stop working. Both were true...kind of...in certain situations.

[pearljammer10]

This proves the point of all the physics students in the high school saying, "why do we have to learn this?" not really having to learn it because it wont be useful to them.

[nickagneta]

Actually the surprising part of the discovery is not that there is something that travels faster than the speed of light but they they found out with concrete evidence and that there is proof of it.

Theories on faster than light travel and even neutrinos traveling faster than light have been around for decades. Einstein's Theory of Relativity is itself a just a theory and has had major scientifically documented evidence being put forth to disprove many portions of it for years.

Also Roy, though Einstein's Theory might not be 100% correct, it has proven to be mostly correct and established an entire bedrock upon which Quantum Physics is based. The thing about the science of quantum physics is it didn't have a multi-billion dollar industry trying to throw every crack pot theory into the mainstream media to dissuade people from believing it is an actual science, like say, another science has that might not be 100% correct but is still fundamentally sound and viable.

[angryguy77]

And here I thought someone finally took the time to clock Scal's 40 time

[fairweatherfan]

This proves the point of all the physics students in the high school saying, "why do we have to learn this?" not really having to learn it because it wont be useful to them.

Even if this is true, E=MC2 has worked in every single circumstance but this one.  It's not like it's gonna get tossed out the door.

[Redz]

We know very little of what there is to know, but it is the pursuit of knowledge, the curiosity to explore and question that makes us the clever creatures we are. Einstein will always be right up there with one of the great creative and inquisitive humans.

[Roy H.]

We know very little of what there is to know, but it is the pursuit of knowledge, the curiosity to explore and question that makes us the clever creatures we are. Einstein will always be right up there with one of the great creative and inquisitive humans.

Yeah, absolutely.  There's no disputing what Einstein added to the field, regardless of whether he was correct on this particular theory (which still hasn't been disproven conclusively).

[BASS_THUMPER]

so..

subatomic particle goes faster than light..


i been proved that theory wrong years ago...

hot links and carlos rosi at my crib goes faster than the speed of light..

i clocked it

[slamtheking]

well I guess it's just a matter of time until they discover the dilithium crystals now!!  Vulcan here we come!!   

[Bahku]

It has also been proven in labaratory experiments within the last year or so, that "c" is not "c", (meaning light is not constant). They have actually shown, (on very small scales, obviously), that light can be slowed down as well as increased, which also sheds a somewhat dubious light on Einstein's theory.

Thing is, Einstein suspected this even as he put forth his proposals on quantum theory, and intimated that someday soon it would be no more than a stepping stone to a greater, more accurate theory on the fundamental properties of the universe/gravity/light. He was not of a mind that quantum theory was the be-all, end-all explanation.

[BballTim]

  If you believe this is true, the most impressive part of the story might be the fact that they were able to synchronize two events that occur 450 miles apart to within 10ns. For perspective, light travels over that distance in about a 400th of a second, that margin of error is a 100 millionth of a second. So the discrepancy between when the particle left and when it was measured to leave, the discrepancy between when it arrived at the destination and when that was measured as well as the variation between the clocks at the source and destination combined add up to about 1/250,000 of the amount of time it takes light to travel between those two places.

[BASS_THUMPER]

  If you believe this is true, the most impressive part of the story might be the fact that they were able to synchronize two events that occur 450 miles apart to within 10ns. For perspective, light travels over that distance in about a 400th of a second, that margin of error is a 100 millionth of a second. So the discrepancy between when the particle left and when it was measured to leave, the discrepancy between when it arrived at the destination and when that was measured as well as the variation between the clocks at the source and destination combined add up to about 1/250,000 of the amount of time it takes light to travel between those two places.