[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 32 KB, 596x399, 1321790603706[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048820 No.4048820 [Reply] [Original]

Turns out neutrons are faster than light.

How fucked are we?

>> No.4048827

It won't be correct until the exparamebt is done at another particle accelerater, and if it's true were not fucked

>> No.4048833

Neutrinos, not neutrons.

>> No.4048838

>>4048820
back to >>>/b/ son

>> No.4048843

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236

I guess they've recreated the results.

I thought it was because the relative frames of reference of the satellites hadn't been accounted for.

>> No.4048846

>>4048838
>saging a scientific thread

This is why modern 4chan sucks.

>> No.4048847

>>4048827
Well, if it's correct, it's correct. Confirmation doesnt affect the truth.
My question is what are the implications if causality is incorrect?

>> No.4048858

The barman says "Sorry sir, we don't serve neutrinos".
A neutrino walks into a pub.

>> No.4048859
File: 88 KB, 298x332, Will Schmidt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048859

>>4048858

>> No.4048861

Causality will not break. Physics as we know it will not stop. They will just adjust things accordingly to account for this sort of thing. It's called the 'scientific method' for a reason.

>> No.4048863
File: 96 KB, 340x444, ITT.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048863

>> No.4048864

Neutrins are the biggest hipsters particles in the universe, they got fed up with Einstein's mainstream theory.

>> No.4048866

>>4048861
And if getting rid of causality is a part of the adjustment?

>> No.4048867

>2011
>double posting your shitty threads on multiple boards because you desperately want to get traction in your thread

>2011
>samefagging your thread on /b/ because your shitty concepts don't arouse any attention from the majority of users and you have to spam it to the front page to make anyone even glance at it


I seriously hope none of you other than OP does this.

>> No.4048871
File: 12 KB, 220x223, trollface.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048871

ITT People being trolled.

>> No.4048875

Keep trying to explain the world with your science. God will still always be one step ahead of you.

>> No.4048876

>>4048867
Because fuck scientific information and fostering discussions, right?

This boards needs more math equations and religious arguments! XD

>> No.4048879

>>4048876
Make that emoticon one more time and I'll break your spine.

>> No.4048878
File: 2.34 MB, 1920x1080, mell_rideback.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048878

>>4048846
I don't know where you've been the last two weeks, but we've had approximately fifty threads where randomfaggots from other boards come here spamming this shit and going "hahaha scientists dun no anythings, Einsteein pwned!!!!111!!!11"

And we've pretty much exhausted possible legitimate avenues of discussion in them.

So I'd forgive him for saging yet another neutrino-thread.

>> No.4048880

>>4048879

XD

>> No.4048882

>>4048880
I just broke your spine. Make it two more times and I'll collapse your brain in on itself.

>> No.4048884

>>4048875
>implying that trying to have an understanding of one's surroundings is somehow being in a "game" with "God". As if science were in some way trying to compete with whichever deity you hold dear.

>> No.4048886

>>4048847
I for one am genuinely curious about this.
Anyone care to take a gander?

>> No.4048887

>>4048886
No. Fuck yourself with a rake.

>> No.4048888

>>4048884
Retard detected.

>> No.4048890

>>4048887
Are we too afraid of the possibilities?

>> No.4048892

>>4048875
>omniscient
>one step ahead of you
>one step
>only one step ahead of humans

troll harder

>> No.4048893

>>4048892

>implying it's not possible for an omniscient being to be only one step ahead of humans

>> No.4048894

>>4048884

>implying that God isn't the ruthless DM, and Humanity are the players sitting around the table called planet Earth

>> No.4048895

>replying to obvious trolling attempts

I'm not even gonna quote the person. You know who you are.

>> No.4048896

>>4048890
No. I'd rather you fuck yourself with a rake is all.

>>4048892
Be smarter.

>> No.4048897

>>4048895
> Is that person.

>> No.4048899

>>4048847
>>4048886
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12707-is-a-naked-singularity-lurking-in-our-galaxy.html

Check the part about cosmic censorship.
The same things apply.

>> No.4048902

>>4048899
LOL. Pitiful.

>> No.4048901

>>4048847
Really? Noone wonders what it would mean if found to be false? Wheres the sense of unabashed exploration?

>> No.4048903

>>4048901
No one cares, but go ahead and keep replying to your own posts. You look cool.

>> No.4048906
File: 16 KB, 225x286, 225px-Tesla3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048906

This man right care made that claim 100 years ago.

"OH HE IS A MAD SCIENTIST"

>> No.4048910
File: 436 KB, 1400x1000, XXX_0172_Chris_Foss_Untitled.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048910

>>4048901
"To boldly..." and all that, but if chances are that doing the experiment could in effect destroy the universe, caution is advisable.

>> No.4048912

>>4048903
Wow, have fun destroying the purity of scientific inquiry from the inside. Later.
>>4048899
Interesting, thanks.
So basically many theories of physics would need to be rewritten.

>> No.4048917

>>4048910
How would it destroy the universe? Or would it just destroy our current conception of the universe.

>> No.4048919

with einstein debunked I think we're well under way to finally proving god

i can't wait for all the butthurt

>> No.4048921

>>4048888
Care to elaborate as to how I'm retarded as my puny IQ can't understand.
>>4048894
Even if that were so, >>4048875 would still be wrong as a DM can't lose a game and isn't the opponent

>> No.4048922

>>4048912
Or not. Like I said, it could wreck spacetime, everywhere in the universe.

The problem is that if you can't make predictions, you fucking can't make predictions.

>> No.4048926

>>4048922
Are you saying our realizing cause= effect could destroy the universe?

>> No.4048929

>>4048859
>filename

>> No.4048935

>>4048893
considering the huge lack of intelligence and knowledge in humans, yes, it is impossible for an omniscient being to be only one step ahead

>> No.4048938

>>4048926
No. It's that if cause |= effect, then spacetime wouldn't work properly.

Which is why it's so highly doubtable that neutrinos break causality.

>> No.4048940

>>4048827
But three accelerators of proven the same results.

>> No.4048941
File: 23 KB, 400x400, dont_panic_sticker-p217641030959096404qjcl_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048941

>>4048926
I posted this about an hour ago elsewhere as a joke:
"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something eve more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
Pic related, it was with the post.

>> No.4048948

>>4048938
Or would it be that if cause = effect, our understanding of spacetime would be incorrect.

>> No.4048971
File: 208 KB, 1229x751, chris_moore_03.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4048971

>>4048948
Not to that amount. If our understanding of spacetime and stuff that's based on it, like say, EVERYTHING, nothing that we've discovered would work.
Your computer wouldn't work.
Your central nervous system wouldn't work.
Babbage's mechanical computers wouldn't work.

>> No.4048976

>>4048910
>>4048922
And keep in mind guys, the Buddhists and Taoists have been saying cause = effect for thousands of years, but theyre still here.

>> No.4049001

>>4048971
Hmm, very interesting. So basically IF it were true, damn near every theory made would need to be redone, and our current understanding of ourselves and the universe would be completely false.
Fuck, the controversy over this makes a lot more sense now.

>> No.4049007

>>4049001

Not really. Our understanding of what happens to atoms at incredibly high speeds and energy levels would need to be retooled, but most of our scientific theories aren't based around that, because nearly everything isn't at such an incredibly high speed or energy level.

>> No.4049015

>>4049007
So non-causality would only apply at fundamental levels?

>> No.4049019

>>4049015

Non-causality would only apply for objects travelling faster-than-light if we kept our thinking that light speed is the speed limit of the universe. Clearly, if neutrinos are faster than light with mass, it's not the case, and we'd change our theories to have a new speed limit, or possibly new theories on what happens at extremely high energy levels.

>> No.4049020

so, can we, theoretically, use neutrinos as a form of ftl communication? like radiowaves, one sends a message from pluto and a detector on earth receives it.

>> No.4049154

>>4049020
Theoretically we could send neutrinos back in time.

>> No.4049165

>>4049020
Maybe. But the expenditure would be immense for little extra gain.

>>4049154
Not the way it works.

>> No.4049182

They are particles from the future, being observed by us (in the past) now.

>> No.4049188

>>4049165
Isn't that the controversy?

>> No.4049201

Can a group besides CERN repeat the experiment?

>> No.4049204

>>4049201
T2K in Japan, but that's going to take a while since they are still recovering from the earthquake.