Old experiments with superluminal speed

[Molecule]

Hey guys,

I'm just wondering what the general opinion is of these two articles:

http://www.electrogravityphysics.com/html/speed_of_light.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3303699/We-have-broken-speed-of-light.html

It seems strange to me that if these two experiments were confirmed, they're not making bigger splashes in the scientific pond.

 

[Bill_K]

The first one is an April Fool's joke. The second is an experiment that was carried out seriously, but erroneously interpreted. It's been refuted many times, for example see http://sitemaker.umich.edu/herbert.winful/files/comment_on_nimtz_stahlhofen_experiment.pdf".

 

[Passionflower]

The first one is an April Fool's joke.

Do you have a proof to support your allegation?

If quantum mechanics is correct then photons do not have a definite velocity, because if they did the uncertainty principle would be violated.

On average it is c but a single photon does not definitely always travel at c in vacuum.

 

[bobc2]

Do you have a proof to support your allegation?

If quantum mechanics is correct then photons do not have a definite velocity, because if they did the uncertainty principle would be violated.

On average it is c but a single photon does not definitely always travel at c in vacuum.

I'm sure the experiments were not one photon at a time. Also, I think the fundamental question should be discussed in the context of QFT. Then, we have to be careful about the model we are talking about and whether we are really keeping track of the same particle en route--random virtual particle creation, etc.

But, yeah... sounds like a hoax.