Controversial Study: Speed of Light May Not Be Constant

  • Thread starter PhysiSmo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Speed
But the good point with science is that you don't need to trust some specialists, you can read by yourself the paper of G. Amelino-Camelia, J. Ellis, N. Mavromatos, D. Nanopoulos, and S. Sarkar: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=181460 .In summary, a recent measurement by the MAGIC telescope in Las Palmas has detected a 4-minute divergence between photons of high and low energy traveling from galaxy Markarian 501, suggesting that the speed of light may not be constant but instead dependent on the photon's frequency. This has sparked interest and skepticism within the professional community, with some questioning the validity of the measurement and its implications
  • #1
PhysiSmo
I read recently that the MAGIC telescope in Las Palmas detected a 4min divergence between photons of high and lower energy, which were traveling from galaxy Markarian 501. They say that the measurement is pretty accurate and it only remains to be re-confirmed.

An old paper from J.Ellis, D. Nanopoulos & N.Mavromatos arises on the surface now, were it is suggested that the speed of light is not constant, but depends on the photon's frequency.

Could someone pinpoint me a paper or something for more details? What does the rest of the community say about these claims?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
PhysiSmo said:
I read recently that the MAGIC telescope in Las Palmas detected a 4min divergence between photons of high and lower energy, which were traveling from galaxy Markarian 501. They say that the measurement is pretty accurate and it only remains to be re-confirmed.

An old paper from J.Ellis, D. Nanopoulos & N.Mavromatos arises on the surface now, were it is suggested that the speed of light is not constant, but depends on the photon's frequency.

Could someone pinpoint me a paper or something for more details? What does the rest of the community say about these claims?

There was an earlier thread here on the subject that you may find interesting...
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=181460

p.s. This is probably more of a 'Beyond the Standard Model' subject
 
  • #3
Moved.

Zz.
 
  • #4
PhysiSmo said:
... What does the rest of the community say about these claims?

According to all the signs I have seen, indicating physicists' response, the rest of the community has been skeptical.

Discussion on several blogs where professionals were among those posting went in the direction of being displeased that MAGIC reported based on only one observation of the proposed effect.

At least with two observations from sources at different distance one could say something about whether the delay occurred at the source, or accumulated during travel. In any case one observation is a pretty small sample.

People in the professional community were also displeased that the authors used the phrase "probe quantum gravity" in the title. Since they had no convincing evidence that the delay accumulated during travel---and was not due to some unknown process at the source---it was necessarily a very preliminary finding and there was said to be an element of overstatement in the title.

I didn't hear anybody cheering. And quite a lot of people booed, as I recall.

The SPIRES library entry does not indicate acceptance for publication so far--I don't know how reliable that is.
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=FIND+EPRINT+0708.2889 [Broken]

There have been four citations including the one in this paper, published in a Chinese journal.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0709.2807

For me personally, what I think about it depends on what they follow it up with. The paper was based on observation of one flare in 2005. One would think that since they have been operating several years they might have observed several similar flares (from other active galactic nuclei besides Markarian 501). I haven't seen any followup reports. The absence of followup is worrisome. But before dismissing their finding as a fluke, I personally will wait a while longer to see if it is eventually confirmed by other observations.

===================
Maybe there is some good news hidden here. At least the MAGIC team astrophysicists think they have an instrument that can see incoming TeV gamma photons from a flare and classify them according to energy. They think their instrument is sensitive enough to plot arrival time against energy and detect a delay of a few minutes. That looks like progress to me---if only in the department of telescope technology.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
Thank you for your answer Marcus (and RetardedBastard for pointing the old thread)! I've also heard that Polchinski stated that if the results are true, then string theory confronts great problems. Why does this happens? Does it have to do something with Lorenz invariance?
 
  • #6
PhysiSmo said:
Thank you for your answer Marcus (and RetardedBastard for pointing the old thread)! I've also heard that Polchinski stated that if the results are true, then string theory confronts great problems. Why does this happens? Does it have to do something with Lorenz invariance?

Concerning the Lorenz transformations:
since an essential element to construct these transformations is the invariance of the speed of light when measured in two different inertial frames,
if the speed of light is depending on the frequency and the latter on the place where the light is,
we can guess that Lorenz transformations will become true only very locally ...!
As longas the speed of light does not change too much in a given part of space-time.

I hope it could give you a part of the reasons why this hypothetic result (if true) would change the face of physics.

Concerning the string theory, I cannot help you. I am just reading the book of Brian Greene to learn the basics.
 

1. What is the controversy surrounding the speed of light?

The controversy surrounding the speed of light is based on a recent study that suggests the speed of light may not be a constant, as previously believed. This goes against the widely accepted theory of relativity proposed by Albert Einstein, which states that the speed of light in a vacuum is always constant.

2. How was this study conducted?

The study was conducted by analyzing data from a telescope at the Keck Observatory in Hawaii. The researchers observed distant quasars and measured the wavelengths of the light they emitted over a period of several years. They found that the wavelengths did not remain constant, as they should if the speed of light is constant.

3. What implications does this have for our understanding of the universe?

If the speed of light is not constant, it could have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It may require us to rethink some of our fundamental laws of physics, including the theory of relativity. It could also potentially change our understanding of the age and expansion of the universe.

4. Is this study widely accepted by the scientific community?

At this time, the study has not been widely accepted by the scientific community. It has been met with skepticism and criticism from other scientists, who argue that the data used in the study may not be reliable. Further research and replication of the study are needed to determine the validity of these findings.

5. What are the next steps for researching this topic?

The next steps for researching this topic include further analysis of the data and replication of the study by other research teams. It is important for scientists to thoroughly examine and validate these findings before any major conclusions can be drawn. Additionally, new technologies and techniques may need to be developed to accurately measure the speed of light in different conditions.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top