-
Asked by pamelsingh to Daniel, Andrew, Hayley, Natalia, Peta on 18 Nov 2011. This question was also asked by markbarwell, catttl.
Question: what do you think would be the most interesting / best implication of neutrinos being able to travel faster than light ?
- Keywords:
-
Daniel Scully answered on 15 Nov 2011:
Well the implication that things can travel faster than the speed of light is pretty fantastic in itself. Einstein first proposed that in 1905 and everything in physics since then (106 years) is built on that rule…
So every rule goes out the window and who knows what could be possible.
Particles may be able to time travel? (but not people, it would only be a small effect)
Energy may no longer be conserved.
It may be evidence of extra dimensions.It really would be the most exciting discovery in physics, probably ever!
-
Peta Foster answered on 15 Nov 2011:
I reckon it would be throwing over most of our understanding of physics, as particle with mass cannot by definition travel at the speed of light yet alone faster… unless there is some strange higgs mechanism for neutrinos that works differently from all other particles…
However so far i believe there have been 2 subsequent experiments which have said that neutrinos do not travel faster than light so i think Einstein’s ghost can relax 🙂
I have attached the link if you are interested 😀
http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/icarus_refutes_operas_superluminal_neutrinos-83684
-
Andrew Cairns answered on 16 Nov 2011:
It would be a huge development, with huge re-writing of textbooks across physics and other sciences. As Dan says, a lot has been based on the fact that nothing can travel faster than light.
That being said, there is precedent for such a huge re-writing of theories. What we understand of science right now is just the best theory to explain the experiments we have done… once a new experiment disproves this, science must change to explain it.
-
Hayley Smith answered on 18 Nov 2011:
If it’s proven to be definitely true (I’m somewhat sceptical) the most interesting / best implication for me would be a rather strange one, I believe it would pose some further (maybe not quite as scientific) questions:
If nature has these particles that can travel faster than the speed of light, why would it only choose to apply to neutrinos?
And why would it only be an absolutely tiny tiny fraction quicker?
I mean, come on, if it’s going to do it at all it might as well go the whole hog and make them much faster?I think working to answer some of those questions would be a very interesting outcome…
Comments
Daniel commented on :
The question for faster-than-light neutrinos is till very much still open.
Although interesting, I think the theory behind the Icarus result is a little suspect.
The result to watch for is Opera (the original experiment) repeating their measurement with much shorter pulses of neutrinos, which are easier to time.
There is a similar experiment in America as well, MINOS, which may also be able to measure them travelling faster than light (if indeed they do).
My experiment in Japan is also a similar to Opera and MINOS, but we would need to upgrade our timing systems in order to do the measurement… I think we’ll wait until Opera have checked again before we do that.
Daniel commented on :
BREAKING NEWS TODAY!
Opera have today released a repeat of their measurement using much shorter pulses of neutrinos, which are much easier to time, and they still measure the neutrinos as travelling faster than light!
That’s got rid of everyone’s best guess as to what could be going wrong, so either it’s a much more complicated mistake or physics is about to get very exciting!
Daniel commented on :
There’s a BBC News article on the new result if you’re interested:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236
Hayley commented on :
That is pretty impressive – it will certainly be interesting to see the response of the scientific community to this news!
Repeatable measurements are key to science, so this is one step further to validating their initial results.
I’m still curious though, as to if they are faster at all, why is it only by such a small amount? It does seem very strange to me!
Andrew commented on :
I know much less about this than the other guys here! I am excited as a scientist, though know just about the same as the man on the street. It will be interesting to see what comes of this!
Daniel commented on :
The BBC have picked up on the Icarus result as well now:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15830844
Basically, some theorists made a prediction about what they thought would happen IF neutrinos could move faster-than-light. They predicted that the neutrinos would loose lots of energy as they travelled.
So they looked in a neutrino detector (Icarus) to see how much energy was being left by the neutrinos and it was less than they predicted.
If they had seen what they predicted, this would have been good evidence that neutrinos were travelling faster-than-light – because it would be yet another measurement that was different to our current theories.
But they didn’t see that. This might mean that neutrinos don’t move faster than the speed of light, but it might also mean that their theory for what faster-than-light neutrinos would do is not correct.
After all, we have no theory to explain how neutrinos could move faster-than-light, so it’s difficult to make predictions about what they will do if they did.
I suspect that only a direct measurement of the neutrino’s speed will decide this problem.