Maybe it's all three, Shamus.
On a side note, I bought a new out of the box Ruger LC9 yesterday. It made me happy.
Neutrinos faster than the speed of light...
by EntirelyPossible 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
shamus100
Straight razor?
Damn you, I have to google it.
-
shamus100
Oh, gun.
You wacky Americans. I've been offered a 2 year contract in San Antonio Texas and was warned about you weirdo's and your guns. It scares me a bit...
-
EntirelyPossible
Oh no, compact 9MM. I still just have the three straight razors. Although I did replace my orginal leather only strop with a leather/linen combo strop. the linen side puts an insanely fine edge on the things.
I also bought a telescop, 114 MM to go stargazing with the kids and to take with me when I go camping and hiking to waterfalls near the appalachian trail next week. Four days with no internet and phone. I cannot wait.
-
EntirelyPossible
Move to San Antonio. I get down to austin regularly, they are only an hour apart. I'll come hang out with you and drink whiskey and make fun of people.
-
recovering
there are other possible explanations for the data seen, that do not support the faster then light theory.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/10/mundane-explanations-neutrinos/
-
EntirelyPossible
Agreed, the most probable explanation is that the measurements were off. Having said that, it's still true that SR doesn't mean nothing can go faster than C, but that the barrier cannot be crossed.
And, having said that, if something does go faster than C, that's a whole other can of worms that would turn things upside down.
-
EntirelyPossible
And Shamus, my thoughts on guns depend on where I am.
If I am in NYC and I see someone carrying a gun, i would be nervous. Very nervous. In the countryside or texas, it's common. We all hunt and target shoot. Crime is low and people carrying guns is common, doesn't bother me one bit. I drive an hour and a half into the city, someone carrying a gun is cause for concern.
-
bohm
EP: I think you misunderstand me, i was not trying to be rude. i just noticed you tried to clarify the destinction between GR and SR and i think you mixed them up a bit, since i think eg. the expansion of the universe is something which should be analyzed in the context of GR (specifically, it is one of the first things people tend to do after giving the field equations: showing how it lead to the standard model is cosmology undercertain assumptions).
SR ofcourse contain the concept of space time (specifically minkowsky space), but it is in GR it is analyzed completely and shown to be a riemannian manifold.
"And, since we're being nitpicky, it's not according to Einstein that we will see time going slower for the other person at the same time ;)"
it is certainly a consequence of the lorentz transformations, and since einstein was fameous for his thought-experiments i would be surpriced if this was not one of the things he arrived at before completing SR.
As to the overall question, you are completely correct that SR (or GR) does not rule out these particles moving FTL. But it gives them some very odd properties, like causality violation (not a violation of SR, but WTF?), and behaviour in collisions, assuming 4-momentum need to be conserved.
Take for instance a FTL co-moving neutrino observer: I am quite sure he would see time go backwards in the outside universe? it would be really far out...
Im guessing measurement error, i have even made a bet with someone if we could guess the problem, assuming it is not in the machine. My guess was a gravitational effect, like a big rock in the ground they didnt know about, and which made time slow down according to GR.
-
EntirelyPossible
I didn't take it as rude, at all. Clearly you are more savvy about these things than I am. One of my favorite books of all time (although now out of date) was A Brief History of Time, I think I read that around 14. I love this stuff, but it's not my strong point, although I think I am smarter about it than the average person walking down the street.
I often have to explain complex, nuanced situations to people in the field of data management, computing systems, massively parallel computing systems, etc., I love analogies, talking about general topics at a high level and, where appropriate, moving from the general to the specific. When doing that, you sometimes have to let some of the finer details go to get a point across. That's all I did here, high level overview, summation. Wasn't meant to be 100% accurate, but enough to get the idea across.
My god, I have lived in powerpoint land for far too long.
And I will throw my hat in the ring for a $5 spot (or however many Euros that is) and say it had something to do with the frame of reference and the fact that the GPS satellites they were using to measure distance were moving as well.