Was the faster-than-light neutrino result a mistake caused by a loose cable?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter humanino
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the faster-than-light neutrino results reported by the OPERA collaboration, which may have been attributed to a mistake involving a loose cable connection. Participants explore the implications of this potential error on the validity of the results and the broader context of scientific reporting and verification.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants mention a rumor that the faster-than-light neutrino results may be due to a loose cable connection affecting timing measurements.
  • Others express skepticism about the initial findings, suggesting that many physicists suspected an error from the start due to the conflict with established theories like special relativity.
  • A participant humorously notes the unreliability of GPS, drawing a parallel to the potential error in the neutrino experiment.
  • Some participants speculate on whether the error should be classified as a detector error or a system error, with one suggesting it was a transmission delay rather than a fault in the detector itself.
  • Concerns are raised about the pressure to announce findings prematurely, with some participants reflecting on the importance of thorough verification before publicizing results.
  • There is a shared confidence among some participants in the robustness of current scientific theories, particularly special relativity, which has consistently passed experimental tests.
  • One participant expresses surprise at the simplicity of the error, questioning the diligence of the research team in ensuring multiple independent measurement systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about the validity of the faster-than-light neutrino results, with multiple competing views on the nature of the error and its implications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the classification of the error and the broader impact on scientific practices.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include assumptions about the reliability of measurement systems and the potential for human error in scientific reporting. There is also a noted lack of consensus on the classification of the error and its implications for the scientific community.

humanino
Messages
2,538
Reaction score
8
I came here thinking you would already be discussing. It is a just a rumor, but don't we love them ? Let us keep an eye, or an ear, on what will hopefully come out soon.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html?ref=hp
It appears that the faster-than-light neutrino results, announced last September by the OPERA collaboration in Italy, was due to a mistake after all. A bad connection between a GPS unit and a computer may be to blame.

Physicists had detected neutrinos traveling from the CERN laboratory in Geneva to the Gran Sasso laboratory near L'Aquila that appeared to make the trip in about 60 nanoseconds less than light speed. Many other physicists suspected that the result was due to some kind of error, given that it seems at odds with Einstein's special theory of relativity, which says nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. That theory has been vindicated by many experiments over the decades.

According to sources familiar with the experiment, the 60 nanoseconds discrepancy appears to come from a bad connection between a fiber optic cable that connects to the GPS receiver used to correct the timing of the neutrinos' flight and an electronic card in a computer. After tightening the connection and then measuring the time it takes data to travel the length of the fiber, researchers found that the data arrive 60 nanoseconds earlier than assumed. Since this time is subtracted from the overall time of flight, it appears to explain the early arrival of the neutrinos. New data, however, will be needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Faster-than-light neutrino result reportedly a mistake caused by loose cable
At the AAAS meeting's discussion, CERN's director of research, Sergio Bertolucci, placed his bet on what the results would be: "I have difficulty to believe it, because nothing in Italy arrives ahead of time."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
We're waiting for a formal announcement (press release) from CERN.
 
Astronuc said:
We're waiting for a formal announcement (press release) from CERN.
Wise attitude. I am really just teasing, because this announcement will probably take a while. Despite the surrounding noise (which I am contributing today), CERN has been very cautious.
 
humanino said:
I came here thinking you would already be discussing. It is a just a rumor, but don't we love them ? Let us keep an eye, or an ear, on what will hopefully come out soon.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html?ref=hp


Faster-than-light neutrino result reportedly a mistake caused by loose cable
Sounds reasonable to me. My GPS tells me I'm in Timbuctoo when I'm really in Hainesport.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In before the CERN faster then light cover up conspiracy theories.
 
Jimmy Snyder said:
Sounds reasonable to me. My GPS tells me I'm in Timbuctoo when I'm really in Hainesport.
Would not that be about 10 \mus-light apart ? Where does your wife say you are ?
 
Tell them a "neutrino walks in bar" joke. Meet somebody who works at CERN.
 
humanino said:
Would not that be about 10 \mus-light apart ? Where does your wife say you are ?
Timbuctoo is in Westampton, just about 500 nanoseconds from Hainseport. My wife thinks I'm in the living room. Actually, I'm in the family room, but it's not prudent to contradict her so I'm moving.
 
  • #10
So my theory that the speed of light is actually d has been exploded?
 
  • #11
explocec.
 
  • #12
Since the initial announcement, my bet has been on a detector error. Would this count as a detector error, or some other type of error? I just want to know if I can collect my bets if this ends up being the official explanation. :biggrin: (Oh, wait, I didn't actually place any cash bets...drat! I guess I don't care then. :frown:)
 
  • #13
Moonbear said:
Since the initial announcement, my bet has been on a detector error. Would this count as a detector error, or some other type of error? I just want to know if I can collect my bets if this ends up being the official explanation. :biggrin: (Oh, wait, I didn't actually place any cash bets...drat! I guess I don't care then. :frown:)
I'd call it a system error. Apparently the detector worked fine, but the transmission of the information was delayed.

There is a good reason that PF has a relatively strict prohibition on overly-speculative posts.
 
  • #14
Astronuc said:
I'd call it a system error. Apparently the detector worked fine, but the transmission of the information was delayed.

Drat! Oh, wait, I didn't bet any real money, so it's all good. :biggrin: Really, the biggest mistake they made was the big press release of the initial report before they went through and double checked all of these systems for errors. On the other hand, it's a good lesson for the public about scientific method and that nothing is a foregone conclusion until it has been checked, checked again, and checked some more. And, even then, it's not a foregone conclusion.
 
  • #15
Moonbear said:
Drat! Oh, wait, I didn't bet any real money, so it's all good. :biggrin: Really, the biggest mistake they made was the big press release of the initial report before they went through and double checked all of these systems for errors. On the other hand, it's a good lesson for the public about scientific method and that nothing is a foregone conclusion until it has been checked, checked again, and checked some more. And, even then, it's not a foregone conclusion.
The authors reported concerns about errors. I seem to remember some experimenters not putting their names on the released report. Quite a few folks here expressed the concern about error and the need to check each and every detail. Of course, others started speculating about FTL this and that, or the demise of special relativity.

I wonder if scientists succumbing to the pressure/temptation to be the first to announce a discovery - or to publish?
 
  • #16
I am not surprised that the results turned out to be wrong. I have a lot of confidence in our current theories and the results they've been giving.

I am surprised that the error turned out to be something so embarrassingly avoidable.

I had assumed that a research team doing experiments like this (that will be scrutinized by the whole world) would be diligent enough to have more than one independent measurement system. I'd think they'd see a discrepancy in their two measurements and quickly get to the root of it. Surely they didn't just trust all their hardware software and processes without checks and balances?

I guess the answer is: yes they did and it is commonplace.
 
  • #17
DaveC426913 said:
I am not surprised that the results turned out to be wrong. I have a lot of confidence in our current theories and the results they've been giving.
Me too. Special relativity has withstood every experimental test for over a hundred years. I don't know of any other theory that has done so well for so long.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Did a Clock Error Make Neutrinos Appear Faster Than Light?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Graduate BREAKING NEWS: Error Undoes Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Results
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate What was the explanation of OPERA superluminal neutrinos?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Graduate Can Data Travel Faster Than Light Computation?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Time & Gravity in Rotating Faster Than Light?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Graduate New MINOS measurement of neutrinos speed through earth
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Graduate IceCube rules out last SM explanation of ANITA’s anomalous neutrinos
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Graduate Did the OPERA Neutrino Experiment Really Discover Faster-Than-Light Travel?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Graduate Can neutrinos travel faster than light?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Graduate Can EM waves carry information faster than light?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K