Neutrinos faster than light speed? What do you guys think?

Entropee
Gold Member
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
I feel like this is one of those things where they say "oh my god this will change physics forever" but it ends up being being incorrect. Either way it is odd that they would measure faster then light speed at all, I'll give them that. But 60 nanoseconds? Not quite enough to make me convinced. What do you guys think? There are so many reasons why this couldn't be true in the first place.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I too am highly skeptical of the results, but not for the reason you state.

Entropee said:
But 60 nanoseconds? Not quite enough to make me convinced.
How long would be enough to convince you?

At light speed, 60 nanoseconds is a journey of epic length. Light can travel the breadth of your computer screen in that time.
 
Yes I realize at lightspeed 60 nanoseconds means a lot of distance covered but its still too close to the "barrier" of lightspeed to come off as anything but an error in calculation or a malfunction. Were talking a fraction of a second here.
 
Entropee said:
Yes I realize at lightspeed 60 nanoseconds means a lot of distance covered but its still too close to the "barrier" of lightspeed to come off as anything but an error in calculation or a malfunction. Were talking a fraction of a second here.

Yes, a fraction of a second, which we are extremely good at taking measurements of despite what you think.

Go watch the actual announcement from CERN ( http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1384486 ) before thinking they don't know what they're doing.
 
Pengwuino said:
Yes, a fraction of a second, which we are extremely good at taking measurements of despite what you think.

Go watch the actual announcement from CERN ( http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1384486 ) before thinking they don't know what they're doing.

The GPS system had an accuracy of only ±20 ns, among other things, including that no actual neutrino was clocked at FTL speeds.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top