Neutrinos faster than light - Sixty Symbols
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- Discussing recent results suggesting neutrinos may be traveling "faster than light".
With Tony Padilla and Ed Copeland
Read the paper at arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897
Visit our website at www.sixtysymbols.com/
We're on Facebook at / sixtysymbols
And Twitter at #!/periodicvideos 
Наука
They corrected their results and Neutrinos were slower than light. It was just a problem with their instruments.
+The Artificial Society yep, their gps was calibrated incorrectly...
maybe that was a gravitational wave :)
you "pulling" my leg!
A loose wire...
womp womp
Neutrinos faster than light - Sixty Symbols
next video :
Neutrinos slower than light - Sixty Symbols
By far the most interesting series on RUclips!
looking forward to next video.
Thanks!
As soon as I heard of this I wanted a SixtySymbols video immediately! And you delivered!
The team reported two flaws in their equipment set-up that had caused errors far outside their original confidence interval: a fiber optic cable attached improperly, which caused the apparently faster-than-light measurements, and a clock oscillator ticking too fast. The errors were first confirmed by OPERA after a ScienceInsider report, accounting for these two sources of error eliminated the faster-than-light results.
A Neutrino!
Who is there?
Knock, knock!
If it would really be possible to send signals back in time, it would be so cool to send Einstein what modern physicists discovered.
That is hilarious. +1
But how? If the knocking happens last no one will say who is there and there is no need to say a Neutrino...lol
That would violate causality.
Metagross31 But would he be able to decipher a message sent to him using neutrinos?
ComandanteJ
Well, if it was true, that neutrinos can travel back in time and we would have a system to encode messages using neutrinos, that the receiver also knows and he would see/mesure the neutrinos and decode the message it maybe could be possible.
But to say it for sure I know too less about special and especially general relativity, sorry :D
"Two beers please"
...
A neutrino walks in to a bar
This is very annoying that there are no updates on videos like this one.
+Kavetrol This. But its not SixtySymbols style to correct or update any of their older videos.
+Kavetrol you do realize they made a follow up video
0:21 "Scientists at CERN and in Italy have found that there's a new tree now."
kept checking youtube for a sixty symbols video on this. awesome job. glad the professor from the beginning is back too.
Thank you so much! Your video about tachyons was amazing!
This might be good for either sixty symbols or numberphile. Could you do a video on a Tachyons that have an imaginary number as their mass? And how would the Higgs Boson (which gives particles mass) work with a particle with imaginary mass?
Primus Productions Actually, the Higgs doesn't give particles their mass, it just influences the one they already have.
Particles have mass independently of the Higgs, but that mass changes in different ways through interactions with Higgs fields. That's why there are variations in mass between particles, that's the question that Higgs, Brout and Englert set out to answer 50 years ago. Their research culminated in the Higgs mechanism, which describes the process by which the masses of particles are modified, ending up with different masses.
🤓
negative mass= MIND BLOWN!
square root of -mass = MIND SUPER-BLOWN!
I gaped at the fact.
Garrison Pendergrass actually mass = m(i)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) thus if velocity is greater than light, it becomes negative and you take square root of negative number thus get imaginary mass.
@Entrepreneur101
E = m? What do your symbols stand for exactly?
I assume in your last line you mean F = d(m.v)/dt. How does that support faster than light travel?
I've been waiting eagerly for this video ever since I read the news :)
9:26
Well it's definitely not a tachyon.
This was proven wrong. The reason why they measured the neutrino going faster than light is because of a broken fiber optic cable.
It can also be the cause of a tunnel's shape and gravity. While going straight under the earth, particle crosses denser gravity which can affect particles speed in the relation with a surface and gps whose are the curve
Assholes
Spreading wrong data,the scourage of this planet
Actually the average value was still faster than light. But it was so close that they concluded that it was "consistent" with the speed of light which we know cannot be right because they oscillate.
Thanks for making this video on popular request! You guys are GREAT!!!
Speaking of videos by request: here's one I'd LOOOOOOOOVE to see: one about the different interpretations of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen, Many Worlds, etc). I can't even begin to conceive how, in order to "solve" many of the weird facts of QM, so many physicists today can agree about something as unimaginably weird as the Many Worlds interpretation.
Was waiting for this video! :)
Wasn't this debunked just weeks after? It was measured wrong or something.
It was, it was blamed on a faulty cable.
Martin Lamppu Always expend 20% of your budget in cables. LOL
Yes - sixty symbols shouldn't leave misleading and erroneous science lingering on the web.... and all the mumbo jumbo about extra dimensionality.
davet11 I thought it was calculated to be the time it took for the information to travel via satellite. Something that everyone missed.
Yes, I remember the measurement error had to do with the way satellite GPS coordinates are time corrected. Maybe that's the "extra dimensionality" hogwash they were talking about in this one :-)
Those are Team Rocket neutrinos.
That was so funny! X.D
finally, i have been waiting for this video since the news came out.
i've watched all of the sixtysymbols videos and i think this one was not only one of the best, but the funniest. i always love some good nerdy physics jokes :P
Well as soon as the guy said they didn't get the spike of neutrinos three years ahead of the visible light is proof right there that they don't travel faster than the speed of light
True. Thought the same
It's painful watching this knowing what they don't know
This was posted three years ago.
What's the update on it? Just an error?
Yup. Apparently a 'loose cable' and one other thing i don't remember
could you please make a video of just professor Copeland talking? he soothes me to no end!
This is one of the most exciting times of my life and I'm not even a professional physicist! Hey Sixty Symbols, I'm keeping my eye on you...
"italian scientists" sounds funny but then we remember that Science was established by one of them.
Nevertheless lets be careful :-)
A lot of people want to know my personal opinion on the Cern findings. First and foremost, Cern needs to more imperial data to remain current. Then need to upgrade there facilities and computer systems, also there monitors have a low refresh rate (don't let me get started on the contrast ration). Furthermore Cern needs better water to conduct these tests, basic tap water will NOT do the trick. If Cern can afford it, they should be using bottled water, preferably Poland Spring water.
john mayer what
john mayer you are joking, correct? Refresh rate? Contrast?? Bottles water??? never mind...you are joking.
heavy water is much better
I hate your music Mr Mayer, but your Cern ideas will rock the world and also your body is a wonderland
Very nice job :) Does anybody here know the name of the first professor who appeared in this video?
He's so quiet and relaxing to listen to: I'd love to see more videos with him.
@justsoundtechno - I think it arives "before we can see it" - at the same level as you can travel faster than sound, thus making you "arive before you can hear it".
Yeah, I saw the video upload date. Would be nice if they responded this video with the update though.
Best explanation I've heard heard.
i was waiting for them to make a video about this.
@hitachi088 cheers... fixed it
@Exmech2 Do you have an answer in regards to time stamping particles that are accelerated at outrageous velocities? I've designed discrete measurement systems for several companies including HP and as far as I remember there really isn't logic that can capture transitions in the low to mid microwave range let alone infrared, visible, ultraviolet, and well on into gamma rays. It would be interesting to see what Cern is using for hardware though. Times change.
@0hfuzzyu No. Devices are used that time-stamp as the particle hits the detector. I can assure you, everyone in any measurement field (aviation engine parts repair for me) knows full well the delay in computer processing time, and what is needed to get an actual measurement.
@Pianoguy32 I don't know if there's a reason why light should be the fastest particle, but there are very good reasons to think that there is a fundamental speed limit which no particle can break, and it appears that light happens to go at that speed, which is why it's called the speed of light. If the neutrinos have broken that limit then it would be big news.
So. A lesson from Flatland by E A Abbot. If you can find another dimension you can jump over the line and violate the laws of flat distance. Point Set Topology tells us how to combine spaces - by forming the Cartesian product of the multiple spaces. Then consider relativistic 4-space crossed with another with simply a shortened metric allowing the movement of particles between two locations that are shorter than the standard metric...
Were they just counting with the distance or did they account the effect of gravity so the trajectory would be a slight arc. That might cause such a small increase in speed.
@luvboricha it was a bunch of neutrinos from the year 3048.
I can't wait to find out the results of this test, and what kind of awesome knew information we could gain if the test came back to show that neutrinos can indeed go faster than light. I really wonder if it would mean that neutrinos could pass -through- black holes since the gravity I think is equal to the speed of light? I don't know. I'm not even sure if neutrinos could be used in that way, but it'd be awesome to say that we know for sure what's happening -inside- of black holes.
@DeFliegendeHollander Its the Cherenkov Effect :) Also useful for thinking about tachyons
Looking at all the neutrino vs speed videos/blogs i cannot find any talk of the possibility of the neutrinos been affected by the increased gravitation due to them traveling closer to the center of the earth than gravitational measurements at the surface of Earth ? Can the strengh of the gravitational field be calculated/Measured along the path the neutrino's are taking ? Is it possible that some Dence rock is increasing the strengh of field and therefore affecting the time readings ?
quick question. as you have to calculate the differences for gps satelites that are further from earth surface, shouldn't you also calculate the "local particle time" when it travels far below earth surface?
just asking :)
@brace110 Probably because the detector was in Italy. As far as I know it went from Switzerland (CERN) to Italy (a big particle research institute).
Finally. Been waiting for the Proffs to talk about this.
@allenrobinson2012 hi thanks for the refs. whats the name of the feynman lecture, and is it here on yt? ty ia
finaly! i waited so long for this video
@sbergman27 I didn't word my question correctly. Are we going to have a video on the possible explanation by the Dutch physicist, Ronald A.J. van Elburg who shows that Neutrinos are not traveling faster than light???
@austin777136 Yes, and I know that train of thoughts you explained, thought so for myself for some time. But photons travel at the speed of light and they have mass (and are effected by gravity), yet their mass is not infinite but very small. Your explanation shows why bradyons can't reach c, but since they don't apply to luxons they probably also don't apply to tachyons (could tachyons have a rest mass?).
The response of the shown physicists is the interesting aspect of this video now. The amounts of skepticism, displayed wishes for it to be true, etc. That's what this document can still show us.
Are we going to have a video on the possible explination to the faster than light Neutrinos???
@Themayseffect there is no light "in general". the visible spectrum still moves at C. the difference you are inquiring about is a result of the wavelength and the frequency, the speed is constant.
@crazytrain7114 I think they detected it on the basis of a certain amount of neutrinos so they would be able to tell if it was there neutrinos or just random neutrinos. I'm not sure but I think that's what they did. So imagine they sent 50,000 neutrinos from A to B if 1 arrived first they would easily distinguish that from the 50,000 to follow after.
@obaeyens But it is possible in principle to measure 'c' directly, without getting light involved, from time dilation or relativistic mass increase measurements, and I assume that has been done. Do the neutrinos still exceed 'c' when it is measured in this way, rather than by measuring light?
@FHomeBrew Thanks. This topic hits close to home. :)
"But in February, the OPERA team also discovered that a loose fiber optic cable had introduced a delay in their timing system that explained the effect."
@allenrobinson2012 but light is a wave/particle to begin with. It doesn't travel in a straight line. I am not even sure how many dimensions it passes through as it travels in a direction. The wave would obviously be longer than the straight line it traveled. I am not sure that we actually "know" the speed of light. I am guessing we screwed up measuring the speed of light. or it is higher than what we thought it was.
@soulsfang No, actually I meant the speed of sound. "Not too long ago" is a subjective phrase, remember that when you read this part, because in the light of how long our species existed, it was the speed "barrier" that had the longest fascination with the strongest consensus. The speed of light has a consensus yes, but there are many scientists who believe it can be exceeded and that we just don't know how yet. ;)
@1612ydraw I believe the direction of the reaction products are determined by multiple layers of detection.
@HellsingDemon I'm assuming it has something to do with time travel?
Calculated from the X17 particles inductive charge radius the neutrinos are 41.30047 GeV/c^2, 44.6012 Gev/c^2 and 48.1657 GeV/c^2
@ChungRts Relativistic mass is given by the equation m=1 / sqrt(1 - (v / c)^2) * rest mass. Let v=c. Any number divided by itself is 1. 1^2 is 1. 1-1 is 0. Sqrt(0) is zero, so you end up with m=1/0*rest mass. Therefore, the limit of the rest mass as you approach the speed of light is infinity, so a particle with mass traveling at the speed of light would theoretically have infinite mass. F=ma, so infinite force. E=Fd, so infinite energy. The amount of energy in the universe is finite.
may i throw in an question.. is it faster the the speed light> in the visible light spectrum. or light in general.
it would be incredible if you manage to interview one of the scientists at cern, even if its over skype or something, with a translater(i dont know if they speak english or not..)
@austin777136 im not sure if i'm understanding this correctly. But why can't "c" have been incorrect and should have originally have been the speed of this nutriono?
@Dirtboy101 The speed of light comes out of the physical properties of the medium (even if that medium is nothing: a vacuum). The speed of light for any medium is defined by 1/sqrt(epsilon*mu) where epsilon is the permittivity (the ease at which electric fields can penetrate the medium) and where mu is the permeability (the degree to which the medium can support a magnetic field). We can empirically measure these two constants very, very accurately and hence find very close approximations of c.
@hooloovoo1st is it true there can never be a true vacuum because of virtual "particles"/quantum foam? will the speed of light be measured a hair faster between casimir plates, where some of those quantum foam energies/wavelengths are removed?
@tasilbhurn not only was this found to be a technical fault.
there are many ways to proove that it violates time but, as a meager first year physicist, lorentz contractions is how the speed you travel at in reference to a plane affects your time, length, speed to an observer on the plane. one formula is t=(gamma)(t0), t=observed time, t0=real time and gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2). lets say the v is 2c, gamma=-(1/sqrt(3))i. this goes into imaginary numbers where gamma needs to be a real value
Cool question. Off the top of my head, everything. To start with, light-speed is dependent on constants like the permittivity of free space, so they would have to be adjusted. But then we'd get a new value for the charge of a proton.
Changing the speed of light would also affect gravitational lensing, which means either changing the strength of gravity or recalculating everything's mass.
Even our time and length scales are defined in terms of the speed of light!
@tmafkap p=h/λ because E=sqrt(m^2c^4 + p^2c^2) and the photon has zero rest mass. As for changing speed in different mediums, it doesn't. It only appears to because of the frequent absorption and re-emission.
(the photons may still be going at the speed of light while bumping into such a small amount of particles/different medium, thus distorting the speed as a whole. Example: If you have to flashlights, and you shine, simultaneously, one of them with the air as the medium and the other with glass as the medium, the one traveling through air would reach an indicated destination before the other.)
I was wondering if a wormhole could potentially explain this. Not saying it does, but that would be an exciting development I think.
@Pablols7 The time dilatation is caused by speed or gravity and is really small at this scales.
@obaeyens So tachyons are only a "concept" at the moment then? (unless this experiment holds true)
@allenrobinson2012
I think there are cables where light it goes almost straight....single-mode cables with small core. And it doesnt really matter, because we can measure the time it takes for light to travel through the cable without the detector to "calibrate" it...eg...once cable is laid down, we send through a bunch of impulses and measure the time it takes to arrive. It should give a pretty nice number to subtract later..from real detector test.
@sbergman27 Agreed, I didn't think of that. If imaginary mass could be construed as negative mass, than e=mc2 would still apply correct? It would HAVE to travel faster than light due to its 'negative' mass
May I ask just how accurately the speed of light can currently be measured?
Wikipedia says they reported their equipment was not as accurate as they ocne thought. A fiber optic cable was plugged in wrong and an oscillator (?) was going too fast I guess. Too bad.
That only explains one set of results. According to Gavin Wince (search youtube), there were similar results at other collider facilities. A loose fiber optic cable at one facility doesn't simply explain away similar results at other facilities using independent instrumentation.
@50LightSabersInAPack Yeah I was thinking that too. I mean it was just recently that the mass of a proton was found to be different than originally measured.
@brace110 because cern "only" sent the neutrinos to italy. the italian laboratory under the gran sasso was studying their speed.
was the experiment made in vacuum and did the particles travel faster than the speed of light in vacuum? 'cause maybe they don't interact with air particles whereas light is slightly influenced by friction.
Great video
@docsquee The symbol for light speed is a small 'c'.
C stands for "heat capacity". It's how much heat (in Joules) a quantity of a substance can absorb before it's temperature rises one Kelvin.
Having a negative heat capacity would be at least as awesome as breaking the speed of light. :-)
@austin777136 E=pc, but p=mv, so for m=0 still E=0. Otherwise: p=h/λ and E=hf, a photon's energy, mass and momentum are expressed by it's frequency. They have relative mass, but no definable rest mass, because they don't rest. That doesn't mean m_0=0, it means m_0=no way, José. And I'm really not sure about the space and time thing, because of stuff like diffraction, differing speed of light in different mediums (heard of Cherenkov radiation?), and so on.
Isnt the simplest explanation that the speed of light was measured slightly incorrectly in the first place?
Even in a "vacuum" there is still small amount of matter that could be interacting with light and slowing it down.
Since Neutrinos are neutral and very weakly interacting when they pass through matter, perhaps they are able to travel closer to the theoretical speed of light in ideal circumstances?
Hell yeah! I guess Brady was thinking like we were; there should be a 60 Symbols video about this!
@bign3ck Where did you get this?
Maybe you´re right, if a star "dies" you could still see its light due to the time the light takes to travel from the star to your eyes. For example if the star is 1 light year ( measurement ) from here then we would be able to see it's light for 1 year more after it dies...
But my question is: if you travel back in time ( since the sound travels slower ) would the light and sound be sincronized? And how would you use a neutrino to travel in time if it's too small?
@RustyCyler Matter and energy are equivalent - I suppose you're asking whether a neutrino has a real mass? Yes, it does (even tho it's tiny).
What's the thing you're associating it with that you don't like at 5:30
@jswen31 If that is the case ( or something like) then the next step should be doing it over a much greater distance,i.e. through the earth, from UK to Australia. I dont understand Neutrinos at all, but I know they have been trying to catch some deep underground,so it must be worth exploring.
Hey Brady, ever hird of the "bradyon"?
Google it, I can't paste a link here... :D
the neutrinos from SN1987A arriving in expected time is a good point, although a great point the paper makes about this is, the energy of their experimental neutrinos were about 1000 times more energetic.
@Rascal157
i mean i studied physics but i haven't researched this incident, just read about it on cnn which doesn't really provide any technical details
@PensFan109 The speed of neutrinos is already known to be near the speed of light as a first approximation (in the order of a thousandth of a percent different). At that speed the 730km journey takes 0.00243 seconds ie 2.43ms. During that time the Earth will have rotated about 10 millionths of one degree on its own axis, so the effect on aiming isn't very big.
Now I'm a bit out of the latest, but perhaps if one were to consider the higgs field as a sort of surface (of perhaps the roiling surface of spacetime itself) and one were to think of this as a surface that due to interaction causes friction (whether higgs induced mass or not) and should some wimps be so "smooth" as to lack the ability to be slowed; perhaps the speed limit of light is less the limit of the speed of particle, but rather the limit of speed allowed by its active surface in contact with its medium. Less active the surface: less interaction. Leading to faster speeds. This implies less that light is not fast but less interactive. Which means that some particles could be even less interactive (like wimps), implying faster possible speeds due to less interaction. Ergo, lightspeed is less a limit of our universe but rather the limit of the speed of light within our medium. Light can be slowed in many ways and can be pulled about gravitationally. The less active a wimp the less gravity can effect it.this we know. Perhaps, it's less to do with classical gravity and more to do with quantum gravity and its force within the smaller coiled higher dimensions. Just food for thought.
Timmy's my buddy!!
:)
Miss ya buddy. Hope things are going well for you.
Agreed. So would it be similar to antiparticles? I'm so lost...
i love these videos!