I don’t know about you, but I was thrilled to hear that the speed of light is no longer considered an absolute limit on the speed of particles. (“You can take your double nickel and . . . .”) I am even more delighted that comedy has already coped with and internalized the new revolution. From NR alumna Natasha Simons:
“We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” said the bartender.
A neutrino walks into a bar.
(Yeah, I’ve seen the headlines saying the initial stories may be wrong. But we always knew there was gonna be pushback from The Man.)
My favorite limerick (at least that I can print in these comments) is by Isaac Asimov:
There was a young lady named Bright
Who could travel much faster than light
She left one day in a relative way
And arrived back the preceding night.
At least that's how I recall it going.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Warp speed, Mr. Sulu (Potemra)"
d(^_^)b
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExternal Link
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
Seems like the bartender who is travelingfasterthanlight there, Mr. Potemra.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBeat me to it. It would have to be something like the bartender opened up for work and sees a neutrino already in there who says, "WHY THE LONG FACE SUCKER!?!" And the bartender says, "How the @#$!% did you get in here?" And the neutrino says, "I don't know, but if you hum a few bars, I might remember it!" And the bartender says, "GET THE @#$%! OUTTA HERE" and then Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood and a orangutan and the entire defensive line of Southeastern Louisiana University come from out of nowhere and "Amos Moses" starts blasting on the jukebox and next thing you know the neutrino is being flung head first through the window onto the sidewalk.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI knew you were going to say that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have a bar fight circa 1978-1981 fetish.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo, you have a 1978-1891 bar fight fetish.
"McClintock Riders!"
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethose of us who actually studied physics already knew about this. the recent experiment was merely a new form of measurement of something already known to take place.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseexcept not. Stuff moving faster than light is not "already known" as that would fundamentally alter physics as we know them with physicists already at work starting all over. If this were true, which it likely is not, it would change everything.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou never heard of quantum tunneling?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseexcept it has been theorized since the 80's, and confirmed by MINOS measurements in 2005 when measurements showed an average speed slightly greater than C, but there was too much uncertainty to make a definitive statement at the time. the recent experiments simply remove uncertainty.
duh.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt wasn't confirmed by MINOS at all. As you stated, due to the uncertainty of the detectors exact position they downplayed the result noting that because of the uncertainty they did not know if it was significant or not. That's not a confirmation.
This experiment did not remove uncertainty either. The supposed result was not the intention of the experiment. Again, those that conducted it are also highly skeptical of the results.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDid you even read the article? Here is a direct quote:
"One theory Kostelecky and his colleagues put forward in 1985 predicted that neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light by interacting with an unknown field that lurks in the vacuum."
1985 < 2011.
No, wait, let me guess:
It wasn't actually theorized at all then, but because they measured speeds greater than C today, the news went back in time. Yeah. That's it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusetheorized is quite different from known. Lots of things are theorized but not known whether to be true or exist or not. Science and physicists certainly did not assume this to be true. There certainly has been no evidence of particles moving at the speed of light. This experiment is significant because it would be the first evidence. But even now it's not assumed nor is this experiment accepted as evidence as even those that conducted it believe there is likely an error somewhere and are opening up all their work to the rest of the community to find
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe CERN scientists who published the paper seem surprised. I guess they don't study physics as much as you do.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI sure as heck hope it's true. I love when theories are blasted to bits. Everyone should. When people accept the limits placed around them is when we are in real trouble...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo more science!
If we talk about science we'll have to look at this...
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSince neutrinos can pass through the earth without interacting with anything, perhaps they took a shortcut to the destination. They are sneaky little quanta.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe people that don't want to accept this are superluminal deniers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI adored this throwaway from the article:
"Heinrich Paes, a physicist at Dortmund University, has developed another theory that could explain the result. The neutrinos may be taking a shortcut through space-time, by travelling from Cern to Gran Sasso through extra dimensions. "That can make it look like a particle has gone faster than the speed of light when it hasn't," he said."
So proof of the existence of other dimensions thru which particles and perhaps larger objects could take a "shortcut" would be unimportant?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse