iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

CERN: Light Speed May Have Been Exceeded By Subatomic Particle

FRANK JORDANS and SETH BORENSTEIN   09/22/11 10:19 PM ET   AP

GENEVA — One of the very pillars of physics and Einstein's theory of relativity – that nothing can go faster than the speed of light – was rocked Thursday by new findings from one of the world's foremost laboratories.

European researchers said they clocked an oddball type of subatomic particle called a neutrino going faster than the 186,282 miles per second that has long been considered the cosmic speed limit.

The claim was met with skepticism, with one outside physicist calling it the equivalent of saying you have a flying carpet. In fact, the researchers themselves are not ready to proclaim a discovery and are asking other physicists to independently try to verify their findings.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, which provided the particle accelerator that sent neutrinos on their breakneck 454-mile trip underground from Geneva to Italy.

Going faster than light is something that is just not supposed to happen according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity – the one made famous by the equation E equals mc2. But no one is rushing out to rewrite the science books just yet.

It is "a revolutionary discovery if confirmed," said Indiana University theoretical physicist Alan Kostelecky, who has worked on this concept for a quarter of a century.

Stephen Parke, who is head theoretician at the Fermilab near Chicago and was not part of the research, said: "It's a shock. It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that – if it's true."

Even if these results are confirmed, they won't change at all the way we live or the way the world works. After all, these particles have presumably been speed demons for billions of years. But the finding will fundamentally alter our understanding of how the universe operates, physicists said.

Einstein's special relativity theory, which says that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared, underlies "pretty much everything in modern physics," said John Ellis, a theoretical physicist at CERN who was not involved in the experiment. "It has worked perfectly up until now."

France's National Institute for Nuclear and Particle Physics Research collaborated with Italy's Gran Sasso National Laboratory on the experiment at CERN.

CERN reported that a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds. (A nanosecond is one-billionth of a second.)

Given the enormous implications of the find, the researchers spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there were no flaws in the experiment.

A team at Fermilab had similar faster-than-light results in 2007, but a large margin of error undercut its scientific significance.

If anything is going to throw a cosmic twist into Einstein's theories, it's not surprising that it's the strange particles known as neutrinos. These are odd slivers of an atom that have confounded physicists for about 80 years.

The neutrino has almost no mass, comes in three different "flavors," may have its own antiparticle and has been seen shifting from one flavor to another while shooting out from our sun, said physicist Phillip Schewe, communications director at the Joint Quantum Institute in Maryland.

Columbia University physicist Brian Greene, author of the book "Fabric of the Cosmos," said neutrinos theoretically can travel at different speeds depending on how much energy they have. And some mysterious particles whose existence is still only theorized could be similarly speedy, he said.

Fermilab team spokeswoman Jenny Thomas, a physics professor at the University College of London, said there must be a "more mundane explanation" for the European findings. She said Fermilab's experience showed how hard it is to measure accurately the distance, time and angles required for such a claim.

Nevertheless, Fermilab, which shoots neutrinos from Chicago to Minnesota, has already begun working to try to verify or knock down the new findings.

And that's exactly what the team in Geneva wants.

Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that "they are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they've done and really scrutinize it in great detail, and ideally for someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements."

Only two labs elsewhere in the world can try to replicate the work: Fermilab and a Japanese installation that has been slowed by the tsunami and earthquake. And Fermilab's measuring systems aren't nearly as precise as the Europeans' and won't be upgraded for a while, said Fermilab scientist Rob Plunkett.

Drew Baden, chairman of the physics department at the University of Maryland, said it is far more likely that the CERN findings are the result of measurement errors or some kind of fluke. Tracking neutrinos is very difficult, he said.

"This is ridiculous what they're putting out," Baden said. "Until this is verified by another group, it's flying carpets. It's cool, but ..."

So if the neutrinos are pulling this fast one on Einstein, how can it happen?

Parke said there could be a cosmic shortcut through another dimension – physics theory is full of unseen dimensions – that allows the neutrinos to beat the speed of light.

Indiana's Kostelecky theorizes that there are situations when the background is different in the universe, not perfectly symmetrical as Einstein says. Those changes in background may alter both the speed of light and the speed of neutrinos.

But that doesn't mean Einstein's theory is ready for the trash heap, he said.

"I don't think you're going to ever kill Einstein's theory. You can't. It works," Kostelecky said. There are just times when an additional explanation is needed, he said.

If the European findings are correct, "this would change the idea of how the universe is put together," Columbia's Greene said. But he added: "I would bet just about everything I hold dear that this won't hold up to scrutiny."

___

Borenstein reported from Washington.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

GENEVA — One of the very pillars of physics and Einstein's theory of relativity – that nothing can go faster than the speed of light – was rocked Thursday by new findings from one of...
GENEVA — One of the very pillars of physics and Einstein's theory of relativity – that nothing can go faster than the speed of light – was rocked Thursday by new findings from one of...
Filed by Catharine Smith  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8,433
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (159 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cre8iveman
11:00 AM on 11/08/2011
Countless previous experiments have shown that particles gain mass as they near the light barrier. As they get very close to that barrier, the masses of the particles rise exponentially. Even the power of a supernova can only accelerate particles close to, but not at light speed. If neutrinos have a tiny amount of mass as has been suggested, then traveling at or above light speed should cause the neutrino beam to become infinitely massive, which is not what was observed.

Also, supernova 1987A saw neutrinos arrive within three hours of the light from the explosion. If the neutrinos were traveling faster than light by the amount reported, then the neutrinos would have arrived at the detectors four years earlier.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cre8iveman
10:58 AM on 11/08/2011
Faster-than-light neutrino discrepancy explained: The GPS satellites used to measure the departure and arrival times of the racing neutrinos were themselves subject to Einsteinian effects, because they were in motion relative to the experiment. This relative motion wasn't properly taken into account, but it would have decreased the neutrinos' apparent journey time. The Dutch scientists calculated the error and came up with 64 nanoseconds. That's almost exactly the margin by which CERN's neutrinos were supposed to have beaten light (60 nanoseconds).
10:56 AM on 11/07/2011
time travel explained by Einstein is wrong
Einstein misunderstand the theory , he don't understand the effect arising during the travelling at the speed of light , during the travel at the speed more than light & in return journey
what ever may be the speed of travelling time remain same . nothing affect time , time can not be slow / fast or stopped in any condition / any where in the world or out side the world /while travelling or not ,
I can prove his mistake

Jignesh K Bheda

D/221 / bonanza ind. est., Ashok Nagar , Kandivli(e) Mumbai 400101
India
jkbheda@yahoo.com
8828010586
11:11 AM on 11/07/2011
Einstein define time travel wrong
actually he don't understand the effect arise during the travel at the speed of light & more than light he also don't understand effect in return journey
time remain constant in all situation in travel & before travel & after travel .
i feel he did mistake to understand the effect arise during the travel at the speed of light
theory of relativity is wrong explanation by Einstein . nothing can change time , nothing can slow the time , fast the time or stop the time , the speed & direction of time remain same & constant in all circumstances

Jignesh K. BHeda
D/221 Bonanza Ind. Est .Ashok Nagar , Kandivli(E) Mumbai
Maharastra
INDIA
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kritikos
Intelligence is not a science
04:18 PM on 10/20/2011
All of this gobbledegoo and we end up with: "Light Speed 'May' Have Been Exceeded By Subatomic Particle"..............................So What?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:59 PM on 09/28/2011
science is a liar and a thief of respectable philosophies.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:57 PM on 09/28/2011
it's not fair to be blocked no matter what but, i thing that bothers me. ppla lot worse off to-do it with no reason.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:54 PM on 09/28/2011
ppla lot worse off posts, don't get posted. mbe not sharing ideas at all.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:50 PM on 09/28/2011
blocking a respectable post
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:39 PM on 09/28/2011
neutrinos only have connected to the time plate because they are not moving quickly, which is most definable with the equpment to hold their personality as a general granularity or as particle mass expansion compared in conduit with the equipment alone. there is no denying that under anything enlarged massively you will find an aspect of nature, and though these subparticles help in the construct of atoms-they are just that, dead inert and therefore only potential on a relative scale, but having no power of their own like morphing light. They merely scintilate and why wouldnt they: the particle of life would also have other life changing attributes to observe not just scintillation in test gradiation (
01:18 PM on 09/28/2011
We have known for some time that neutrinos are weird. What may be happening is this: the photons move at the speed of light as they propagate, but they are continually running into "things." Maybe not particles (though absorption and re-emission by the medium is the reason why the speed of light in a medium is < c) but maybe the very fabric of space itself. But the neutrino, ghost particle that it is, simply ignores most of the "things" that are decelerating the photons. So light propagates more slowly than a pulse of high-velocity neutrinos, but the speed of light remains the same. This can't be verified at present because science has never found any kind of quantum granularity in space. But if Feynman was right, then there is no such thing as a vacuum, so the "speed of light in a vacuum" would be an intellectual construct rather than an observation.
Whatever the final outcome, this should be good for a few dozen PhD's to teeth themselves trying to figure this one out.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:25 PM on 09/27/2011
every year discoveries are made with radioactive reactions; podons, neutrinos, to name just two. There is a large part of them in these supposed light emitting particle waves, a basically radioactive, though it is not classified as metal related in any way, neutron movement between almost purely microspcopic matter details when the neutrinos produce scintillators; which in layman term is like layered photo disturbed microscopic levels shown to be theoretical parts of one thing which is only in-theories purported to tally measurement levels at a subatomic text. This is of course almost like counting to infinity in a lifetime and then saying origins like zero and infinity have no activity because they are continuous and therefore alive, breathing organisms capable of change, or for that matter are also capable of teaching about time travel
02:34 PM on 09/27/2011
I know nothing about science and all you intelligent scientists and physicists need to help me out. Is it possible to exceed the speed of light or not??? Please try to be blunt.
01:25 PM on 09/28/2011
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity indicates that any entity that is travelling below the speed of light cannot reach the speed of light, because of the effects that are handled with the Lorentz Transformations. Time slows down. Mass increases. Mathematically, the amount of energy needed to accelerate an object increases without bound as the initial velocity of the object approaches c. IN lay terms, an "infinite" amount of energy would be needed to reach lightspeed.
Mathematically, it also appears that there could be classes of particles (tachyons) that travel faster than the speed of light but which can never go slower than c. By definition, if you are travelling faster than the speed of light, then you are going backward in time. So if you can ascertain a way to reverse the direction of your personal time vector, you can exceed the speed of light.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Girard
I will take a Raptor over a politician anyday.
11:54 PM on 09/28/2011
I thought the theory was as mass reaches the speed of light it becomes more infinite. If mass increases, wouldnt it go against the law of matter?
Or are you implying is it possible that Einstein knew,the law of matter would be compromized, that if mass DID reach the speed of light that all Laws of Physics might very well be compromized?
Might be dumb questions.
Those were honest questions, and not meant to be rhetorical.
Please respond.
strangiato
Ha Ha...Charade You Are
10:56 AM on 09/27/2011
The confidence by which uneducated and unfortunately arrogant people speak about "guaranteed errors" in a complex experiment is at times startling. How ironic. The heretic that continuously asked some of the best questions and exhibited astounding humility throughout his life now symbolizes infallibility and "perfection" in the minds of many followers. I think he would be very disappointed. Einstein's theories about specific and general relativity never totally displaced Newtonian physics and certainly weren't without doubts and problems. Einstein himself would be the first to admit it. Light speed and it's significance for establishing the connection between mass and energy applies to a class of particles within a subset of physics. Just as we couldn't measure photon mass with a beam balance and discovered many years after Einstein's death that light is bent in the presence of gravity - so too we will find other features about the limitless universe that we didn't know before as new methods are devised to see what couldn't be seen before. Like the Newtonian and Einstein comparison - it won't necessarily undermine everything that we've come to "know" but may add tremendously to our ultimate understanding.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maxwelldog
even if i don't go anywhere, I'll still be late.
10:40 AM on 09/27/2011
excuse me, but, do the science editors here only read a paragraph at a time from the Special Theories?
Einstein did NOT say that the speed of light was the theoretical speed limit.
He said it was OUR speed limit.
He did say, however, that all things within a system are part of that system.

You guys need to stop smoking the light up there in your rooms...
strangiato
Ha Ha...Charade You Are
11:31 AM on 09/27/2011
I've been trying to make that point - albeit with a slightly more technical perspective - without success for the last couple of days. This CERN project and report if nothing else, has exposed an extensive practice of Einstein religion in quantum physics circles these days. To me, Einstein's most important contribution to mankind was his humility and extraordinary ability to provoke thought and insightful questions. Those were the remarkable gifts he used to develop a mathematical model that best fit the data that had been collected to a point in time in his life. Many years later, we know that the data he was working with was limited and thus we expect our understandings to change as new data comes along in our quest to overcome the difficulties imposed by our "being part of the system" under observation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maxwelldog
even if i don't go anywhere, I'll still be late.
12:09 PM on 09/27/2011
I just read above this comment.
Good points, except for...(was that sarcasm?)... the heretic part.
Einstein was one of those scientists whose understanding of religions as being the opposite of the creation portrayed him as non-religious.
But, he had some profound observations about the creator.

None-the-less...The only question remaining seems to be one of mankind's oldest and most important quests.

What weapon can we build from it?
(I wish THAT was sarcasm...)

d=^))
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Girard
I will take a Raptor over a politician anyday.
09:30 AM on 09/27/2011
Just an observation, but for those who might not have really seen or understood it, the headline read 'MAY have been exceeded by subatomic particle' and did not say that it actually had?