# Physicists Break the Speed of Light



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BREAKING_LIGHT_SPEED?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
If this is true, this is quite a big day.


----------



## Hershey (Sep 22, 2011)

Warp drive! Well, not really.

Seriously though, are you sure this isn't just a joke?


----------



## cubernya (Sep 22, 2011)

Scientists believe the speed of light isn't a set speed and that it changes depending on where you are. It has yet to be proven as enough research hasn't been done yet.


----------



## Muesli (Sep 22, 2011)

theZcuber said:


> Scientists believe the speed of light isn't a set speed and that it changes depending on where you are. It has yet to be proven as enough research hasn't been done yet.


 
This. It depends on what the light is travelling in. Particles can and do exceed the speed of light in the water of nuclear reactors.

Interesting article nontheless. I vote for magic.


----------



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

sort of, the speed of light is constant relative to you. no matter how fast you go, you observe all light traveling at light speed. It doesn't change depending on where you are, it's just constant relative to you.


----------



## cubernya (Sep 22, 2011)

No, they ran a test testing the speed of light in the Northern and Southern hemisphere and they came back significantly different.


----------



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

news to me, can you link us to an article?


----------



## cubersmith (Sep 22, 2011)

theZcuber said:


> No, they ran a test testing the speed of light in the Northern and Southern hemisphere and they came back significantly different.


 
Wow. I find this kind of thing fascinating. Would love to see a link.


----------



## cubernya (Sep 22, 2011)

Can't find the article again

Found a different one though. I go faster in my car than light does in this expirament http://jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/slowlight.html


----------



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

It will be hard to have a constructive conversation on this topic, as very few people actually understand this stuff. It's complicated. I'm not claiming I understand, but I don't think having the ability to slow light down changes the significance of something going faster than the speed of light.


----------



## cubersmith (Sep 22, 2011)

theZcuber said:


> Can't find the article again
> 
> Found a different one though. I go faster in my car than light does in this expirament http://jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/slowlight.html


 
Will enjoy reading that tomorrow. Its too late now


----------



## cubernya (Sep 22, 2011)

I'll get on my laptop in a couple minutes to look for the article faster


----------



## ben1996123 (Sep 22, 2011)

Awesome.

Also, @thezcuber I saw an article once about where light was stopped completely.


----------



## Muesli (Sep 22, 2011)

theZcuber said:


> Can't find the article again
> 
> Found a different one though. I go faster in my car than light does in this expirament http://jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/slowlight.html


 
You're missing the point of this. Light travels at a constant speed through a vacuum. Empty space. It's easy to slow light down. 

Speeding it up over c is something special, although skeptical Muesli is skeptical until it's repeated.


----------



## aronpm (Sep 22, 2011)

I, of course, will wait for sufficient evidence. I'll remain skeptical until then.



theZcuber said:


> Can't find the article again
> 
> Found a different one though. I go faster in my car than light does in this expirament http://jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/slowlight.html


 
r u srs


----------



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

Muesli said:


> You're missing the point of this. Light travels at a constant speed through a vacuum. Empty space. It's easy to slow light down. Speeding it up over c is something special.


 exactly, thats what i was trying to say. light slows down when it goes through any medium. if not, it wouldn't get diffracted into the rainbow pattern.


----------



## ianography (Sep 22, 2011)

aronpm said:


> I, of course, will wait for sufficient evidence. I'll remain skeptical until then.


 
So shall I. I need more information than just one article to give a valid statement.


----------



## chrissyD (Sep 22, 2011)

that's pretty amazing if it's true. But if scientists can find a way to make toast in a few seconds i'll be even more impressed


----------



## SpacePanda15 (Sep 22, 2011)

Muesli, I belive you were reffering to Cherenkov radiation. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation


----------



## Micael (Sep 22, 2011)

chrissyD said:


> that's pretty amazing if it's true. But if scientists can find a way to make toast in a few seconds i'll be even more impressed


 
I should think about it then.


----------



## cmhardw (Sep 22, 2011)

That's very cool if the result is repeated at another lab! The article gives the impression that this is likely due to an error in the calculation of the angles/distances/etc. between the two cities where the neutrino beam was traveling. Still, this is neat stuff!


----------



## MiPiCubed (Sep 22, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> That's very cool if the result is repeated at another lab! The article gives the impression that this is likely due to an error in the calculation of the angles/distances/etc. between the two cities where the neutrino beam was traveling. Still, this is neat stuff!


Indeed! If it turns out right, today is a pretty significant day. And just by chance I got my PB single, and hopefully my first BLD success tonight.


----------



## aronpm (Sep 22, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> That's very cool if the result is repeated at another lab! The article gives the impression that this is likely due to an error in the calculation of the angles/distances/etc. between the two cities where the neutrino beam was traveling. Still, this is neat stuff!


 
You might find this article by Phil Plait interesting too.

(On a side note, he is friends with the _other_ Chris Hardwick  )


----------



## Muesli (Sep 22, 2011)

SpacePanda15 said:


> Muesli, I belive you were reffering to Cherenkov radiation.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation


 
Yeah, that's the one.


----------



## cmhardw (Sep 22, 2011)

aronpm said:


> You might find this article by Phil Plait interesting too.
> 
> (On a side note, he is friends with the _other_ Chris Hardwick  )


 
Very cool article! I like how he mentions the results from the supernova to put this all into perspective (even thought this analogy has flaws, which he outlines). As to him know ing the other Chris Hardwick, that's funny! Small world I guess


----------



## qqwref (Sep 23, 2011)

>physicists make measurement error
>gigantic shitstorm all over the internet
>mfw


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Sep 23, 2011)

qqwref said:


> >physicists make measurement error
> >gigantic shitstorm all over the internet
> >mfw


 
Precisely.


----------



## souljahsu (Sep 23, 2011)

Ha. Ha. Ha.
This is ridiculous.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Sep 23, 2011)

aronpm said:


> You might find this article by Phil Plait interesting too.


 
Oh, nice. That's a pretty cool article. Thanks for sharing.

I'm just going to wait until the fat lady sings on this one. I doubt it's true, but I'll wait and see. 

PS: Totally off-topic:



souljahsu said:


> Ha. Ha. Ha.
> This is ridiculous.


 
Update your signature. It's outdated by at least a second (on both average and PB).


----------



## PatrickJameson (Sep 23, 2011)

qqwref said:


> >physicists make measurement error
> >gigantic shitstorm all over the internet
> >mfw


 
I found the, "someone please tell us why we're wrong" attitude from the scientists quite cool. It demonstrates how science works pretty well.


----------



## Hershey (Sep 23, 2011)

PatrickJameson said:


> I found the, "someone please tell us why we're wrong" attitude from the scientists quite cool. It demonstrates how science works pretty well.


 
A null hypothesis?


----------



## Julian (Sep 23, 2011)

PatrickJameson said:


> I found the, "someone please tell us why we're wrong" attitude from the scientists quite cool. It demonstrates how science works pretty well.


I agree. It's hard to find people with this attitude.


----------



## Zubon (Sep 23, 2011)

Light can travel at different speeds depending on several factors such as the medium it is traveling through. "C" is a physical constant which just happens to be the speed that light travels when in a vacuum.

Although Einsteins theories have been shown to be incomplete and not 100% correct, I doubt that anything discovered here will end up violating special relativity. However, it would be cool if those neutrinos really did travel faster than c.


----------



## buelercuber (Sep 23, 2011)

i'll only count it when they can find something faster then C in a vacuum.


----------



## buelercuber (Sep 23, 2011)

Zubon said:


> Light can travel at different speeds depending on several factors such as the medium it is traveling through. "C" is a physical constant which just happens to be the speed that light travels when in a vacuum.
> 
> Although Einsteins theories have been shown to be incomplete and not 100% correct, I doubt that anything discovered here will end up violating special relativity. However, it would be cool if those neutrinos really did travel faster than c.


 
ninja'd


----------



## deathbypapercutz (Sep 23, 2011)

I was under the impression that the speed-of-light limit on massive particles was a theoretical bound. If so, and if this experimental result is verified, it'll have some pretty exciting theoretical ramifications.

I have no evidence or knowledge on which to base this statement, but if I had to guess, I'd guess that the experimentalists screwed something up


----------



## Zyrb (Sep 23, 2011)

Time travel here I come! But seriously pretty interesting.


----------



## timelonade (Sep 23, 2011)

I'm pretty sure Futurama tells us they have to change the speed of light in 2206.


In reference to the posts above, there are people trying to find something to plug the holes in special relativity, there were 2 spacecraft that went adrift and stopped fitting the pattern. Although it was also written in the story I read that they had decided dark matter was to blame.
Oh how I would love a change in C over a confirmation of "dark matter" ._.


----------



## aronpm (Sep 23, 2011)

timelonade said:


> In reference to the posts above, there are people trying to find something to plug the holes in special relativity, there were 2 spacecraft that went adrift and stopped fitting the pattern. Although it was also written in the story I read that they had decided dark matter was to blame.


 
You mean the Pioneer anomaly?


----------



## Cubenovice (Sep 23, 2011)

Pff...
We all know Feliks broke light speed first, just watch him zeroing...


----------



## Godmil (Sep 23, 2011)

Hmm, I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## MiPiCubed (Nov 18, 2011)

This was shown to be an experimental error shortly after it's release, but recently tests have reproduced similar results. This actually might be true, but is far from being totally proved. 
http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/opera_confirms_neutrinos_travel_faster_light-84763


----------



## vcuber13 (Feb 23, 2012)

http://www.globalnews.ca/world/worl...er-than-light particles/6442586764/story.html


----------



## cubernya (Feb 23, 2012)

vcuber13 said:


> http://www.globalnews.ca/world/worl...er-than-light particles/6442586764/story.html


 
Figures that it was flawed (most likely)


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 23, 2012)

One of the reports I read today on this blames it on a bad fiber optic cable.

That is to say: THEY PLUGGED THE MACHINE IN WRONG.


----------



## aronpm (Feb 23, 2012)

vcuber13 said:


> http://www.globalnews.ca/world/worl...er-than-light particles/6442586764/story.html


 
I would just like to point out that this an unconfirmed rumour.

On the other hand, I suspect that the rumour will turn out to be true.


----------



## vcuber13 (Feb 23, 2012)

i just saw it on the news and figured i should post it


----------

