Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

[Old Man]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

It isn't when we can make the ship stay in that dimenesion for some time.

 

If we can--make the stutters--longer--more like occasional--pauses--for overdramatic emphasis--then we could call it--the Shatner drive!

[Ravor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

*chuckles* Repped.

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Anyway, I found an interesting article that talks about possible non-error-related explanations for the result. In a nutshell the high energy of the collision may be ejecting the neutrinos out of the brane where they can travel at supraluminal speeds for a brief time, before they fall back in and become subject to relativity again.

 

http://www.science20.com/alpha_meme/million_times_speed_light-83202

So to test this we need a couple more neutrino detectors? One (if possible) within 10 nano light seconds of the collider, one as far away as possible. If the more distant detector finds neutrinos moving FTL but slower than the Italian detector, that would be consistent with a superluminal skip then going the rest of the way at almost the speed of light. If the detector closer to the collider (within 18 meters, according to the article cited, probably not currently possible) showed few if any neutrios above background, further conformation they skipped around the detector.

 

If on the other hand the more distant detector shows the neutrinos moving at the same superluminal speed as the Italian detector, that would disprove the superluminal skip.

 

Have I got that right?

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

very briefly

 

( 1 ) Global Cooling

 

Nah, the predictions I was referring to were the ones where mankind was pumping so much junk into our atmosphere that we were going to block enough solar radition that global temps would begin to plummet resulting in another great ice age and possibly cumulating in a worst case of a snowball Earth. Pretty much the same rubbish we are being told now, only in reverse.

Ah, global dimming /nuclear winter. I'd call that one problem solved (at least for now).

 

( 2 ) Population Bomb

 

Has my memory failed me and my brain finally finished turning into jello? As I recall the population bomb was set to explode over thirty years ago. Did I miss the massive world wide birth control program and other "negative population growth" measures that was necessary to prevent massive food shortages and a diedown if not actual extiction.

 

( 3 ) The Death of the Oceans

 

Yet the last time I checked, 1998 came and went and the planet is still spinning 'round and 'round.

 

( 4 ) Mass starvation in the First World

 

Of course it is, and in six months when sociality hasn't devolved into cannibalism and the people of the First World are still able to feed themselves I'm sure that we'll still be told that mass starvation in the First World is a "very real possibility" and that we should check the price of food in "x months" as our civilazation is so very fragile and we are hovering on the brink of death and distruction at every waking moment.

Let me get this straight, because these things didn't happen on schedule with the most pessimistic worse case scenario, they are NOT ongoing problems and are absolutely, 100% certain, NEVER going to happen? We will NEVER breed beyond the carrying capacity of the planet? Coral reefs aren't bleaching to death? Commercial fishing isn't declining every decade? A quarter of the calories consumed in the United States doesn't come from one monocrop vulnerable to mutated disease or drought? There will NEVER be another "Year Without a Summer?"

 

( 5 ) Climate Shifts

 

Nothing so pedestrian I'm afraid, I'm talking about the near consistant shifts of climate that this tiny little speck of dirt has been experiencing since before the days of yore. The medieval warming period, the great ice ages, the north and south pole supposedly making an excellant tropical vacation spot, ect. As I've said, I make a large portion of my living off the land, so legitimate changes in the climate are very much a concern of mine, which is perhaps why I'm as disappointed as I am in the enviromental movement for letting the watermelons rise among them.

What medieval warming period? The rest of that is caused by the Milankovitch cycles, which were the 500 pound gorilla of climate change, overpowering not only all other factors, but all other factors put together -- until about 5000 years ago.

[assault]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

"Y2K",

That one I'll give you, media hoax.

 

No. Tens of thousands of people worked for years to make sure it didn't happen.

 

So it didn't.

[Christopher]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

No. Tens of thousands of people worked for years to make sure it didn't happen.

 

So it didn't.

Exactly. That is the Prediction Problem: The mroe precise the prediction, the less precise the reality.

 

Because of all the warnings the problem was fixed, hence nothing hapened. "Because of it" and "In spite of it" are two totally different things.

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

No. Tens of thousands of people worked for years to make sure it didn't happen.

 

So it didn't.

 

If you say so.

 

All I know is that when I first heard about the problem ('93?), I had someone unnetwork* a computer, do a back-up, reset the clock to December 31, 1999 at 11:55 PM, and turn it off for ten minutes. It booted and worked well.

 

By the time the real Y2K rolled around I was semi retired, but did come in long enough to make sure a backup was done on all computers before the office closed for Christmas. (Closed before Christmas eve, didn't reopen until after New Years.)

 

PC's =/= Mainframes, but I heard about more problems caused by the windows ME solution than the Y2K problem.

 

*"Networking" at the time was the computer with the biggest hard drive had a card with 4 stereo mini-plug jacks, 4 others had a card with a single jack, and a wire like a stereo patch cord ran through the ceiling. Few years later when we upgraded to nine computers connected by Ethernet cables we felt like the finest tigers in the forest!

[John T]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

If we can--make the stutters--longer--more like occasional--pauses--for overdramatic emphasis--then we could call it--the Shatner drive!

Gad, no! Then everyone will refer to the first successful test as "The Day the Lightspeed Barrier was Shatnered".

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Scientists don't make things up or at the very least slant the data to fit in their own view of the universe? Got two words for you; "Climate Gate".

 

You've clearly been living under a rock for many years, or you'd know how completely climate change denial has been routed by the scientific community. None of the arguments you go on to advance in this thread have any standing whatsoever.

 

But this is a thread to discuss the recent results from CERN, not rehash climate change science again. Instead of thread hijacking, you're free to revive one of the many threads that did discuss this subject. That will have the additional benefit of allowing you to read the discussions there and formulate your no doubt fresh and compelling refutations in the light of those critiques.

 

BTW, you can cut and paste out of a Word/Notepad/OpenOffice document if you need more time to compose a reply.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

If we can--make the stutters--longer--more like occasional--pauses--for overdramatic emphasis--then we could call it--the Shatner drive!

 

And it runs on.... Pure energy. Pure energy.

[Ravor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Ah' date=' global dimming /nuclear winter. I'd call that one problem solved (at least for now).[/quote']

 

Possible, although I'd argue that it's more likely that the theories claiming that mankind was causing global cooling was a vast overstatement at best.

 

Let me get this straight' date=' because these things didn't happen on schedule with the most pessimistic worse case scenario, they are NOT ongoing problems and are absolutely, 100% certain, NEVER going to happen? We will NEVER breed beyond the carrying capacity of the planet? Coral reefs aren't bleaching to death? Commercial fishing isn't declining every decade? A quarter of the calories consumed in the United States doesn't come from one monocrop vulnerable to mutated disease or drought? There will NEVER be another "Year Without a Summer?"[/quote']

 

Of course not, one would have to be completely daft to look at the world through such rose colored lens. However, my point is that the same Chicken Little type predictions which has always failed throughout the entire history of mankind are yet again being hailed as fact and used to push various flawed policitical "solutions".

 

What medieval warming period? The rest of that is caused by the Milankovitch cycles' date=' which were the 500 pound gorilla of climate change, overpowering not only all other factors, but all other factors [i']put together[/i] -- until about 5000 years ago.

 

Time period when the climate of Europe warmed and ended with "the little ice age", it may or may not have extended to other parts of the world. Milankovitch Cycles are interesting but the theory has some problems to say the least.

 

You've clearly been living under a rock for many years' date=' or you'd know how completely climate change denial has been routed by the scientific community. None of the arguments you go on to advance in this thread have any standing whatsoever.[/quote']

 

*smirks* We'll see who is proven right in the end.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

I'd be curious to see a list of people who think (I don't want to say "believe") that human-caused global warming is happening, and a list of those who think that while there is global warming, humans are not (the primary) cause. And if needed, a third category of people who think there is no warming.

 

Oh, and alongside their names, I'd also like to see their credentials.

 

[Ravor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Sounds good to me provided that we also get to see any other predictive theories they have enspoused, endorsed, or believed.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Eventually. I wanted to start simple. We can always expand upon it later.

[Ravor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

*chuckles* Nice try.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Well, seeing the credentials first would tend to let one weed out those that are not knowledgeable about the climate, and thus who to not waste time even scanning their "predictive theories".

[Ravor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Perhaps, I would agrue that looking at one's track record is the more important judge however as in the end, results are what really matter.

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

BTW' date=' you can cut and paste out of a Word/Notepad/OpenOffice document if you need more time to compose a reply.[/quote']

I get formatting problems and/or strange characters when I do that.

[Christopher]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

BTW' date=' you can cut and paste out of a Word/Notepad/OpenOffice document if you need more time to compose a reply.[/quote']

 

I get formatting problems and/or strange characters when I do that.

I sometimes write post in Windows Notepad (when I need more time or are away from the Internet but have somethign to say). Notepad is also great for "filtering" thigns written in word and other programms.

 

For most parts I start at the settings page and always open Subforums/Subscribed post in a new tab. That way I can always switch back to the settings tab, refresh it (by clicking on settings) and thus keep the session alive.

At least in Firefox you can open a new link in a new tab with either the context menu (right click), CTRL+Click or by klicking on it with the middle mouse button/mouse wheel.

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

Possible' date=' although I'd argue that it's more likely that the theories claiming that mankind was causing global cooling was a vast overstatement at best.[/quote']

And that the postwar global cooling ended at the same time the Partial Test Ban Treaty went int effect just a coincidence. You may be right. That one is testable. Set off a Bikini-class H-Bomb and let's see what happens. My back-of-the-envelope calculations say 1 Celsius degree cooler than the 30-year average proceeding it for two to three years.

 

Time period when the climate of Europe warmed and ended with "the little ice age"' date=' it may or may not have extended to other parts of the world.[/quote']

It didn't, it was a local phenomena. As was the Little Ice Age, which hit North America and Europe in different centuries.

 

Milankovitch Cycles are interesting but the theory has some problems to say the least.

What theory? Milankovitch Cycles are as observable as the phases of the moon. That they are, or were, the primary driver of climate change? What are the competing hypotheses?

 

*smirks* We'll see who is proven right in the end.

Yep, we will. Difference is if you are right, no harm done. If we are right, millions, or tens or millions, or hundreds of millions, or even billions dead. (Not to mention the collateral damage of extinction of non-human species.)

 

While I'm all in favor of a smaller population, I would think that an allegedly intelligent species could bring it about through some mechanism other than letting the Horsemen ride. The idea of being an Accessory Before the Fact in a billion counts of negligent homicide bothers me. I'm funny that way.

[Cancer]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

So to test this we need a couple more neutrino detectors? One (if possible) within 10 nano light seconds of the collider' date=' one as far away as possible. [/quote']

 

Remember: 1 nano light second is very close to one foot.

 

A few points here that may be important. CERN doesn't have a neutrino detector. They know when the neutrinos are produced, but they know that indirectly. They produce the neutrinos by making a pulse of high-energy protons, and slam those into a target. That results in lots of subnuclear wreckage, all moving at very nearly c. The wreckage includes pions and kaons (mesons of the two-quark sort), and some of these decay into muons, which are leptons (non-nuclear particles, "fat electrons"), and muon neutrinos.

 

(The point of this equipment, CERN plus Gran Sasso detector, is to measure losses of neutrinos en route, "neutrino flavor mixing". The time-of-flight result is a by-product, albeit a spectacular one; it isn't intended to be the primary research output of the project.)

 

Muons are charged particles so you can detect them with "ordinary" particle detectors (and CERN does measure these as they go by). Also, you can deflect muons with electric and magnetic fields, so you can (and they do) steer those out of the way so they aren't aimed at Gran Sasso so subsequent decay of those muons (which also gives you muon neutrinos) doesn't go to Gran Sasso and mess up your results, which are strictly trying to see a difference that develops between CERN and Gran Sasso.

 

What the guys at Gran Sasso are detecting is the muon neutrinos made when the muons are formed by the decay of the pions and kaons. The time of flight measurements is based on the difference between when the Grans Sasso guys detect the neutrinos and when the CERN guys detect the muons (not the neutrinos) downstream of where those muons -- and the muon neutrinos seen at Gran Sasso -- are created.

 

The neutrino detector at Gran Sasso is big, 6.7m square and 2-3 times that deep, where the "deep" is in the direction that the neutrinos are moving. That's a large object. They are not detecting anything close to a majority of the neutrinos passing through, but it tells you that making a second neutrino detector as close as possible to the production point, while interesting, isn't cheap. With the limited amount of money available, your idea unfortunately is in the IWBNI ("It Would Be Nice If") bin.

 

On the up side, there are a few other neutrino oscillation experiments in the mill, and it will be interesting to see if those reproduce the result (especially if they can spruce up their methods/hardware to nail down the time of flight). Everyone in the physics community now is waiting to see if the FTL result is reproduced.

[Christopher]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

And that the postwar global cooling ended at the same time the Partial Test Ban Treaty went int effect just a coincidence. You may be right. That one is testable. Set off a Bikini-class H-Bomb and let's see what happens. My back-of-the-envelope calculations say 1 Celsius degree cooler than the 30-year average proceeding it for two to three years.

Wait, I just fetch the Lithium. You bring the hydrogen. Who brings the Detonator(fission bomb)?

 

Anohter interesting part of the competting climate effects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Dimming

We got pretty solid evidence of it's existence, thanks to 9/11.

 

Yep, we will. Difference is if you are right, no harm done. If we are right, millions, or tens or millions, or hundreds of millions, or even billions dead. (Not to mention the collateral damage of extinction of non-human species.)

 

While I'm all in favor of a smaller population, I would think that an allegedly intelligent species could bring it about through some mechanism other than letting the Horsemen ride. The idea of being an Accessory Before the Fact in a billion counts of negligent homicide bothers me. I'm funny that way.

Sometimes a picture says more than thouasand words:

http://www.nicky510.com/comic/the-wise-man-knows-he-knows-nothing/

 

And sometime everyhing just boils down to one thing:

http://www.nicky510.com/comic/gettin-kinda-crowded/

[McCoy]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

I'd be curious to see a list of people who think (I don't want to say "believe") that human-caused global warming is happening, and a list of those who think that while there is global warming, humans are not (the primary) cause. And if needed, a third category of people who think there is no warming.

 

Oh, and alongside their names, I'd also like to see their credentials.

 

OK, McCoy, BS (biology/psychology), JD, Autodidact with a lifelong love of ecology, former Survivalist, childless by choice.

 

That Climate change is happening is beyond dispute. That human activity is one driver of this change, probably the largest one, and has been for the past 5K years, is supported by the preponderance of the evidence, or in the absence of an alternative hypothesis, beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Past sucessful predtictions: Domino Theory is bunk; Death of Osama bin Laden as announced by Bush administration and Benazir Bhutto exagerated; there were no WMD's in Iraq; OJ would be aquitted of murder charges

 

Past wrong predictions: No way George W. Bush will be elected; no way George W Bush will be re-elected; OJ would be acquitted of kidnapping charges

 

Jury still out: Humans have a gene-deep need for religion and there will never be a human culture without something acting as a religion; if we leave Afghanistan now we will have cause to regret it within a decade; liquid water and methane with no vulcanism or plate tectonics means indigenous life on Mars more likely than not

[Cancer]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

I'd be curious to see a list of people who think (I don't want to say "believe") that human-caused global warming is happening, and a list of those who think that while there is global warming, humans are not (the primary) cause. And if needed, a third category of people who think there is no warming.

 

Oh, and alongside their names, I'd also like to see their credentials.

 

 

I remember something vaguely like this 10-15 years ago, when someone in the physics community went to people in the field asking about some important, interesting theoretical (but testable) idea in particle theory (IIRC); it was a poll where respondents were asked two questions: (1) was about the theory idea itself, whether it was right or not; (2) was whether such a poll was useful.

 

The combined results to (1) were all over the map. There was a nearly unanimous response of no to the second.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Science: Particles seen moving at FTL speeds (CERN)

 

And it runs on.... Pure energy. Pure energy.

 

Thank you, I just went to YouTube to find that song lol. I recall their one album where the hidden track was just a recording of a 300 baud coupled modem connecting