Einstein was wrong; Tesla was a time traveler.

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

Also, this is so much weirder than science fiction, and the whole thing people are for serious over.  HOW CAN ONE NOT GET EXCITED ABOUT THIS???

About what?

About scientists having not quite figured out how they got inaccuracies in their measurements?

How the LHC was likened to a new world wonder like an internationally built and sponsored version of the Great Pyramids, and so far has proven to be about exactly as useful? Except the LHC is underground so you don't even get scenic pics of big looming triangles on the horizon.

LHC Scientist 1: "HEY GUYS it's been a while since, um well, actually forever, since the LHC produced any meaningful result, we need some positive PR soon"

LHC Scientist 2: "OH I KNOW let's take the results of this faulty experiment where the data indicates these particles move faster than the speed of light!"

LHC Scientist 1: "GREAT IDEA people will totally believe we can break the fundamental laws of the universe because the LHC is a multi zillion dollar mega project"





Scientist 1: "no honest, the brick fell upwards I checked all my readings"
Scientist 2: "that's kind of hard to believe, did you repeat the experiment?"
Scientist 1: "no I can't because I used a multi zillion dollar mega device to perform it and it will be months before I get another time slot, given that I can secure funding"
Scientist 2: "I know, let's inform the media that we broke the laws of physics"

Not broke, disproved.
But yeah, you're right its probably just a faulty detector or timer or something.
And if it isn't, they probably haven't shown anything other than the fact that a slight tweak is needed to the recorded value of c

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

here's a really good introduction to Tesla's genius:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gOR91oentQ

This guy is my new hero. 

If you're getting this excited about Tesla, just wait. You'll come to realize that the admiration you have for Tesla is in direct inverse proportion to how pissed off you'll be at Thomas Edison.

Not necessarily. In addition to being a plagarist, Edison also tortured animals, so you might hate him more than you like tesla.

[Triple Zero]

Not broke, disproved.
But yeah, you're right its probably just a faulty detector or timer or something.
And if it isn't, they probably haven't shown anything other than the fact that a slight tweak is needed to the recorded value of c

"Broke" and "disproved" mean the same thing in my example.

You don't seem to understand. They won't "slightly tweak" the recorded value of c.

Sure they need to get to the bottom of this, but if you're even seriously considering they might have to change the laws of physics because of this, or a fundamental constant of the universe, you've got your probabilities wrong.

A psychology experiment seems to suggest precognition. Faulty experiment or possible actual supernatural precognition? Will the world media go wild about this or dismiss it and think "probably a faulty experiment" and wait until someone comes with solid evidence.

Math paper claims to prove P=NP. If true, this would revolutionize EVERYTHING. Faulty proof? We don't know because nobody understands the proof and nobody can check it for themselves. Most average mathematicians (rightly) assume there's probably a mistake because, well, it would revolutionize everything. Media ignores it.

Medical research seems to indicate a man can heal people from a distance with his mind. Bad statistics? Wrong control group? Or is it perhaps the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius and we are at the verge of a paradigm shifting breakthrough into a new era of light medicine? Fortean Times thinks so. Other media ignores it.

A multi zillion dollar particle accelerator, 17 miles large, built over the course of several decades as a project between several nations does an experiment that seems to indicate some particles went slightly faster than the speed of light as we know it. Nobody except the original researchers actually have any clue what the experiment is about, or what is going on. The researchers themselves assume their equipment is faulty. Media goes WILD and proceeds to conflate neutrons and neutrinos with their best efforts.

So yeah, faulty equipment or time-travel?

[LMNO]

Not to mention, "broke" doesn't even convey what it would mean if c was "a little bit faster".


Literally --- LITERALLY --- LITERALLY every formula, calculation, and therory since Maxwell's paper in 1862 would be wrong.  It would invalidate the reasoning behind the last 150 years of physics.  All the experimental results that clearly pointed to c being 299,792,458 m/s would be invalid.

Since our current formulas seem to model some parts the universe quite well, we would need massive evidence against it.

[Freeky]

here's a really good introduction to Tesla's genius:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gOR91oentQ

This guy is my new hero. 

If you're getting this excited about Tesla, just wait. You'll come to realize that the admiration you have for Tesla is in direct inverse proportion to how pissed off you'll be at Thomas Edison.

Not necessarily. In addition to being a plagarist, Edison also tortured animals, so you might hate him more than you like tesla.

Yeah, I was kind of horrified at that part, and by kind of horrified I mean I was frothing at the mouth with rage and about to puke from disgust.

[Triple Zero]

Not to mention, "broke" doesn't even convey what it would mean if c was "a little bit faster".


Literally --- LITERALLY --- LITERALLY every formula, calculation, and therory since Maxwell's paper in 1862 would be wrong.  It would invalidate the reasoning behind the last 150 years of physics.  All the experimental results that clearly pointed to c being 299,792,458 m/s would be invalid.

Since our current formulas seem to model some parts the universe quite well, we would need massive evidence against it.

It would be hilarious, though.

That it would.



(edit: woowwww better make sure to get that quote in there to see whaat I'm replying to)

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

Literally --- LITERALLY --- LITERALLY every formula, calculation, and therory since Maxwell's paper in 1862 would be wrong.  It would invalidate the reasoning behind the last 150 years of physics.  All the experimental results that clearly pointed to c being 299,792,458 m/s would be invalid.

The thing is that many of those experiments attempted to directly measure the value of c, without attempting to correct for the refractive index of vacuum energy. It has been hypothesized by some scientists that light traveling between two casimir plates would move at a slightly higher velocity, something known as the "Scharnhorst effect", this recent experiment may have provided some indirect experimental proof for that hypothesis.

[memy]

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.

[Freeky]

Not to mention, "broke" doesn't even convey what it would mean if c was "a little bit faster".


Literally --- LITERALLY --- LITERALLY every formula, calculation, and therory since Maxwell's paper in 1862 would be wrong.  It would invalidate the reasoning behind the last 150 years of physics.  All the experimental results that clearly pointed to c being 299,792,458 m/s would be invalid.

Since our current formulas seem to model some parts the universe quite well, we would need massive evidence against it.

It would be hilarious, though.

That it would.



(edit: woowwww better make sure to get that quote in there to see whaat I'm replying to)

Whoops.

[Doktor Howl]

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.

"We don't know everything, therefore everything we know is wrong."

Sorry, that gets an

UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

[Triple Zero]

But .. Casimir plates are supposed to be just a few micrometers apart, this experiment was over several miles, so how could it provide "indirect experimental proof" for the former? I mean, how are they even related? And why with this experiment and not with all the many other ones before it?

Also, you wanna bet $200 that it won't pan out?

So they sit at monitors all day hoping something would happen that changes things in a way that advances understanding

You actually have no idea how physicists do their work, do you?

Anyway, the examples you name, that physicists aren't entirely in agreement about .. the Grand Unified Theory and Dark Matter, how do those relate to this particular experiment?

[Triple Zero]

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.

"We don't know everything, therefore everything we know is wrong."

Sorry, that gets an

UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

But they MUST be wrong. They stare at monitors all day for crying out loud!


Look at Memy. Does he stare at a monitor all day long? Does he? Well? And is he wrong??


I thought so.


Quantum fucking Erat Demonstrantum.

[Doktor Howl]

Trip, you just don't get it.

If you throw some totally unrelated buzzwords into a rant about physics, you gain credibility.

Duh.

[Doktor Howl]

Quantum fucking Erat Demonstrantum.

"I've demonstrated it, but you can't look"?

[Igor]

So here is an interview with a member of the OPERA collaboration who did not sign the preprint that caused the media furore:

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2011/10/faz-interview-with-german-member-of.html

All of it is relevant, but this part in particular:

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.