Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern

  • Thread starter Thread starter Skeptic92
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good morning, all,

Well, if he already made up his mind, why was he questioning us? Was he a troll? Was he sincere? If I come across something I can’t resolve, I put it aside until later. And, I know better than to apply empirical evidence standards to personal relationships. I apply relationship standards to personal relationships. And Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and each other.
I just wish that exalt knew God loves him, want to free him from his sins and wants to free him from his ignorance of Him. Science is not about love but Catholicism is about love.

Anyway, anybody have any links to follow-up news reports about the findings of the OP?

After reading all the posts, I see something that hadn’t dawned on me before: neutrinos have mass. And, that’s why the science establishment is concerned about the Cern findings.
Am I right to conjecture that any object with mass exceeding the velocity of light on this planet, according to current theories, would develop enough energy to incinerate this planet?

God loves all of you, lurkers, too,
Don
 
donsnow said:
After reading all the posts, I see something that hadn’t dawned on me before: neutrinos have mass. And, that’s why the science establishment is concerned about the Cern findings.
Click to expand...
Actually no. Any particle that we can perceive traveling faster than light, with or without mass, is problematic. The fact that a particle has mass simply compounds the perceived problem.
Am I right to conjecture that any object with mass exceeding the velocity of light on this planet, according to current theories, would develop enough energy to incinerate this planet?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that incinerate is the right word. As particles with mass approach the speed of light, the get heavier and require more energy to move. Infinite mass = infinite energy. What would happen if this occurred is naturally speculative.
 
Exalt said:
Later, there came a time when I realized that I simply did not have enough evidence to continue believing in the Christian supernatural worldview, and ceased my belief – but not until an exhaustive examination of the evidence at hand.
Click to expand...
Sometimes faith can be as simple as obedience.😉
 
Warrior1979 said:
I’m not sure that incinerate is the right word. As particles with mass approach the speed of light, the get heavier and require more energy to move. Infinite mass = infinite energy. What would happen if this occurred is naturally speculative.
Click to expand...
Thats only a problem if you approach light speed from lesser than speed of light.

If you are on the other side, everything is fine, because then, although the mass is large, its imaginary. Its 1/sqrt(1-(v^2/c^2)), which yields in case v is greated than c, sqrt of something negative. No problem there.:eek:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by donsnow : Am I right to conjecture that any object with mass exceeding the velocity of light on this planet, according to current theories, would develop enough energy to incinerate this planet?
Click to expand...
Warrior1979;8406526] I’m not sure that incinerate is the right word. As particles with mass approach the speed of light, they get heavier and require more energy to move. Infinite mass = infinite energy. What would happen if this occurred is naturally speculative.
Click to expand...
May I interpose a question here?

(1) Does the rule stated above apply equally to antimatter?

Protector.
 
louis91766 said:
How do you get to the other side? Would it be through a wormhole?
Click to expand...
There is no known possible or even conceivable way for getting to the other side. But if you are there, there is no infinite mass problem. Infinite mass problem is at speed of light.
 
Warrior1979 said:
Actually no. Any particle that we can perceive traveling faster than light, with or without mass, is problematic. The fact that a particle has mass simply compounds the perceived problem.

I’m not sure that incinerate is the right word. As particles with mass approach the speed of light, the get heavier and require more energy to move. Infinite mass = infinite energy. What would happen if this occurred is naturally speculative.
Click to expand...
Good morning, Warrior1979,

Thank you, for your response.

Did you see my earlier post, about a large, unkown cavern in the rock between Cern and Italy? And, how large would that cavern need to be, to account for the discrepancy between actual and calculated arrival time of the neutrinos? Do you think that could be the source of the problem?

God loves you,
Don
 
donsnow said:
Good morning, Warrior1979,

Thank you, for your response.

Did you see my earlier post, about a large, unkown cavern in the rock between Cern and Italy? And, how large would that cavern need to be, to account for the discrepancy between actual and calculated arrival time of the neutrinos? Do you think that could be the source of the problem?

God loves you,
Don
Click to expand...
The type or absence of material between cern and gran sasso cannot effect the measurement.

Its only important, that the difference between cern and gran sasso is correctly measured. What is in between is irrelevant for speed determination.

have to correct that:
Its not important as long as things with small density are between cern and gran sasso, a large black hole between cern and gran sasso would effect the measurement as it effects the distance, but we would have noticed something like that.:cool:
 
Quote:
Warrior1979;8406526] I’m not sure that incinerate is the right word. **As particles with mass **approach the speed of light, they get heavier and require more energy to move. Infinite mass = infinite energy. What would happen if this occurred is naturally speculative.
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by Protector:
May I interpose a question here?
" Does the rule stated above apply equally to antimatter?"
Protector.
Click to expand...
carn;8408675] Yes. That’s because the rule comes from having a mass and antimatter has mass as well.
Click to expand...
I’m not trying to be facetious here, but is it still called “mass”, or is it “antimass”?
In the same way as both (+10), and (-10) have “value”, but (-10) is a negative value.
BTW, I’m neither a mathematician, nor a physicist so you can tell me nearly anything regarding those two subjects and I’ll assume an expression of awe.

Protector.
 
DaveBj said:
However small the mass of the particle, mass increases as speed → c. At c, mass is infinite.
Click to expand...
How is that possible since neutrinos have mass and according to the MINOS (Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search) experiments they travel at the speed of light?
 
DaveBj said:
However small the mass of the particle, mass increases as speed → c. At c, mass is infinite.
Click to expand...
Would that mean that the mass of a photon of light is infinite then?

Or is that when the wave theory of light kicks in?
 
louis91766 said:
How is that possible since neutrinos have mass and according to the MINOS (Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search) experiments they travel at the speed of light?
Click to expand...
Do they travel at spped of light or nearly at speed of light?

I suspect MINOS claims only the latter. Or maybe their precision is not high enough to distringuish the two.

@Protector

No need to trust me, trust wiki (thats ok in matters of experimental verified scientific facts).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron
"The positron or antielectron is the antiparticle or the antimatter counterpart of the electron. "
"Mass 9.10938215(45)×10−31 kg[1]

5.4857990943(23)×10−4 u[1]
[1,822.88850204(77)]−1 u[note 1]
0.510998910(13) MeV/c2[1]
"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
"Mass 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg[7]
5.4857990946(22)×10−4 u[7]
[1,822.8884845(14)]−1 u[note 1]
0.510998928(11) MeV/c2 "

Same positive sign in both cases. (And the mass is equal within measurement precision.)
And wiki is also right on negative massso far not being observed, because it would be crazy stuff:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass
 
carn said:
Do they travel at spped of light or nearly at speed of light?

I suspect MINOS claims only the latter. Or maybe their precision is not high enough to distringuish the two.

@Protector

No need to trust me, trust wiki (thats ok in matters of experimental verified scientific facts).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron
"The positron or antielectron is the antiparticle or the antimatter counterpart of the electron. "
"Mass 9.10938215(45)×10−31 kg[1]

5.4857990943(23)×10−4 u[1]
[1,822.88850204(77)]−1 u[note 1]
0.510998910(13) MeV/c2[1]
"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
"Mass 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg[7]
5.4857990946(22)×10−4 u[7]
[1,822.8884845(14)]−1 u[note 1]
0.510998928(11) MeV/c2 "

Same positive sign in both cases. (And the mass is equal within measurement precision.)
And wiki is also right on negative massso far not being observed, because it would be crazy stuff:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass
Click to expand...
wiki says:
"In the early 1980s, first measurements of neutrino speed were done using pulsed pion beams (produced by pulsed proton beams hitting a target). The pions decayed producing neutrinos, and the neutrino interactions observed within a time window in a detector at a distance were consistent with the speed of light. This measurement has been repeated using the MINOS detectors, which found the speed of 3 GeV neutrinos to be 1.000051(29) c. While the central value is higher than the speed of light, the uncertainty is great enough that the result does not rule out subluminal or luminal velocity at high confidence. This measurement set an upper bound on the mass of the muon neutrino of 50 MeV at 99% confidence.[28]

The same observation was made, on a somewhat larger scale, with supernova 1987A (SN 1987A). 10-MeV neutrinos from the supernova were detected within a time window that was consistent with a speed of light for the neutrinos. So far, the question of neutrino masses cannot be decided based on measurements of the neutrino speed."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino#Speed
 
I don’t see why it is written in stone that an object can’t travel faster than the speed of light. Just because Einstein said this doesn’t mean it is true. He did not have the technology we have today.

I’m curious as to what this means to say if we wanted to open a portal from here to mars or the moon. I wonder if that type of “stargage” like travel is possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top