Einstein was wrong; Tesla was a time traveler.

[Triple Zero]

Hagner also says that the statistical analysis (matching the proton spectrum with that of the neutrinos) should have been redone by different techniques and that this is currently under way. She further points out that the results are only from one of two detection methods that OPERA has, the scintillation-tracker. Another detector, the spectrometer, should yield an independent measurement that could be compared to the first, but that would take about 2 months.

TWO MONTHS???

Well that seals it then, does it?

If the measurement would pan out to be FTL, we'd have time-travel and we wouldn't have to wait two months.

Quod Eris Demonstrantum!

[LMNO]

The current system of physics, and the knowledge that we have about the particles that make up the universe on both a cosmic and nuclear scale, is an irreconcilable mess.

I'm sure you meant to say, "intricately connected islands of knowledge in a vast sea of ignorance."

Of course.

Of course.

[Xooxe]

An interesting point that I read in Discover's Bad Astronomy section: If neutrinos travelled faster than light speed then we would have detected them well before the photons from distant supernovae by now.

Anyway, I hardly understand much of this, and I'm sure there's tonnes of nuance, so I'm sitting this out.

[Triple Zero]

Seems they found the cause of the measuring error: differences in Earth's gravitational pull at either endpoint.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

SO YOU WERE SAYING, FASTER THAN LIGHT SPAGS??

[Freeky]

Seems they found the cause of the measuring error: differences in Earth's gravitational pull at either endpoint.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

SO YOU WERE SAYING, FASTER THAN LIGHT SPAGS??

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think some people give the consistencies of space and time too much credit. The current system of physics, and the knowledge that we have about the particles that make up the universe on both a cosmic and nuclear scale, is an irreconcilable mess. The community of scientists are split on these subjects and can't seem to come to an agreement about how to mold all of these things into a single unified theory. Maybe things are circumstantial, with the rules bending according to other rules. Like, "Light goes this speed unless it goes this other speed in accordance to this other previously unproven influence".

Physicists in particular tend to keep their mouths shut unless they really have a reason to open them. In a field built on concrete laws, presenting any data that seems to shatter preconceptions are normally delivered with an apologetic expression. After all, if it is a mistake and they present it as fact, their reputations are in the shitter.

So they sit at monitors all day hoping something would happen that changes things in a way that advances understanding, so that physicists can finally come to an agreement on things like dark matter vs. modified newtonian dynamics, and then when something does happen they hope they can prove it's just a mistake for fear of making their colleagues really, really uncomfortable or inciting ridicule if proven a mistake after-the-fact. And if they can't, but can't quite prove it's a fact either, they have to present the data with an air of "sorry for mucking things up further, lads, but here you go..."

Physics is a touchy field to mess with, but the fact is that's the only way we will be able to reconcile all the laws, even not taking into account this speed of light fiasco. It's like having a puzzle laid in front of you but we only have half the pieces and a vague idea of how they fit together, let alone what fills the gaps we don't have. Math is a miraculous tool, but that's only half the battle. Something would have to happen to give us more pieces, or someone would have to look at what we have in a new, unique perspective, if we are going to fit it all together. Einstein started out not as a master mathematician but as a dude with crazy-scientific daydreams. We need another one of those, I think.

I love it when people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about have strong opinions.

[Doktor Howl]

Seems they found the cause of the measuring error: differences in Earth's gravitational pull at either endpoint.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

SO YOU WERE SAYING, FASTER THAN LIGHT SPAGS??

FUCK YEAH.

TRIP PUTS AN END TO THE BULLSHIT.

In the future, people, you might want to consider having an experiment replicated a few times before you run out to sodomize Einstein's corpse.

[Don Coyote]

Seems they found the cause of the measuring error: differences in Earth's gravitational pull at either endpoint.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

SO YOU WERE SAYING, FASTER THAN LIGHT SPAGS??

FUCK YEAH.

TRIP PUTS AN END TO THE BULLSHIT.

In the future, people, you might want to consider having an experiment replicated a few times before you run out to sodomize Einstein's corpse.

BUT HE WAS BEGGING FOR IT!!!!!!!

[LMNO]

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

[Doktor Howl]

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

I BELIEVE I SPEAK FOR MYSELF AND KAI WHEN I SAY UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

[Triple Zero]

They got another explanation that is even better, it seems:

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27260/

[Triple Zero]

DAAMN YOU SCIENCE!!

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/11/neutrino_experiment_affirms_fa.html

Nature editors commented that these damn Neutrinos in their fast cars should stay the fuck away from their wimminz.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

DAAMN YOU SCIENCE!!

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/11/neutrino_experiment_affirms_fa.html

Nature editors commented that these damn Neutrinos in their fast cars should stay the fuck away from their wimminz.

[Kai]

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

I BELIEVE I SPEAK FOR MYSELF AND KAI WHEN I SAY UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

Yes.

Also, Relativity is one of the best supported physical theories. Nothing travels faster than the speed of light. A stray outlier will not convince me otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[Faust]

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

I BELIEVE I SPEAK FOR MYSELF AND KAI WHEN I SAY UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

Yes.

Also, Relativity is one of the best supported physical theories. Nothing travels faster than the speed of light. A stray outlier will not convince me otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

QM and special relativity has large self acknowledged holes. Gravity being the largest problem, trying to renormalise gravity into equations gives rise to infinities (In mass, speed or momentum), at relativistic speeds on quantum scales some very weird shit happens (that we can account for).

I would be pleased if neutrino's do go faster then the speed of light because it could shed more light on both the nature of the photon and the gravitational force.

Three places confirming that it arrived faster than is not a confirmation (though it is more sound than the innital fluke), however this needs to be repeated over a much larger distance with more accurate timing methods to reduce timing error and increase the time between emission and detection, if indeed it is going faster then the speed of light a greater distance will make those numbers far clearer.