CERN Observes Particle Traveling Faster than the Speed of Light, Looking for Independent Verification

I think, rather, this doesn’t bode well for their detection systems. No wonder they can’t find $#@& all.

CERN is that high profile, I don’t think they would have revealed this if they hadn’t already ruled out the possibility of system error.

I travel faster than the speed’o'light every night, in my genuinely epic dreams.

Why don’t we just wait a few months to see if someone sent that neutrino back in time to mess with our minds. It was probably April 1st, 2012 and they messed up the date setting.

Although it now occurs to me that a neutrino going faster than light should be able to time-travel according to the theory of relativity, which it is actively defying by traveling faster than the speed of light, haha.

It was the James Dean of Neutrinos

Anyone else thinking of that old Weird Al song, “Everything you know is wrong”? Everything you know is wrong, black is white, up is down and short is long, and everything you used to think was so important doesn’t really matter anymore because the simple fact remains that everything you know is wrong!

Anyone else thinking of that old Weird Al song, “Everything you know is wrong”? Everything you know is wrong, black is white, up is down and short is long, and everything you used to think was so important doesn’t really matter anymore because the simple fact remains that everything you know is wrong!

I remember reading quite awhile ago about light (or some laser) travelling through some solid glass or plastic material faster than the speed of light – anyone else remember this?

I think that the fuckheads who think its going faster than the speed of light are retarded thats all…. No i dont have proof But if they move faster than light wouldnt that mess up our theory of space time and how black holes pull in everything including light but neutrinos moving faster could escape the gravity and reach a different time zone which would indicate time travel meaning the neutrinos we see are of the past right? 

“the fuckheads”? Dude, 6500 scientists from 500 universities in 80 countries work there.. The best in the world. If anyone know what they’re doing, it’s them. Sure, it might be an error. However, if it’s not, then yes, that would mess up some theories. That’s why they are called theories though, cause they’re not conclusive. They can be proven wrong.

If it’s true, it’s all good news, any find is a good find. Even if we have to rewrite every physics book in the world. (It is about time anyway!).
Einstein was a smart fella’, but he was still human.

“the fuckheads”? Dude, 6500 scientists from 500 universities in 80 countries work there.. The best in the world. If anyone know what they’re doing, it’s them. Sure, it might be an error. However, if it’s not, then yes, that would mess up some theories. That’s why they are called theories though, cause they’re not conclusive. They can be proven wrong.

If it’s true, it’s all good news, any find is a good find. Even if we have to rewrite every physics book in the world. (It is about time anyway!).
Einstein was a smart fella’, but he was still human.

Lets assume that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light !, then the distance between A and B must be shorter than expected, which means that they must have created a WORM HOLE. That would be intresting.

Lets assume that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light !, then the distance between A and B must be shorter than expected, which means that they must have created a WORM HOLE. That would be intresting.

Correcting myself….. there were ~16,000 measurements (not millions) and the measured speed was reported to be 1.0000248c (+- .0000058)

if further experimentation confirms this fi necessarily mean that: 1. time travel is possible; and 2. Einstein’s theory of relativity will crumble down.

It means, rather that a newly discovered phenomenon requires us to improve our theories, and discover more. Newton’s laws did not crumble down when it wasn’t able to account for how light from a star is “deflected” during an eclipse and how Mercury’s velocity doesn’t seem to fit to its predictions. Newton’s laws did not crumble down with Einstein’s theory of relativity and with quantum laws. They just needed to be compensated with another theory. Regarding time travel.

Thanks for the tips there. I only have a medicre knowledge of special relativity and theoretical physics. I made a semantic error there talking about the nanoseconds. I meant that the neutrinos made the trip in a time that was 50-70 nanoseconds shorter than the time a beam of light would take. Also, I wasn’t aware of the way that tachyons fit into the special theory of relativity. Always good stuff to know. Thanks again for the tip. It always helps to have someone with specialized knowledge keeping us on our toes. 

SCINARRY:- I THINK THIS IS POSSIBLE AND WE SHOULD TAKE ‘C’ AS MAXIMUM VELOCITY OF MATERIAL-WAVE PARTICLE INSTEAD OF VELOCITY OF LIGHT….using material-wave because particle and wave nature are complementary and we should not forget about wave nature while discussing motion of particle……

what is dat???

It is possible to have speed greater than light i.e than ‘c’…..but it does not mean that we can travel in past……..(can more simplify)

If this is possible, and the special relativity is wrong, then we will master time traveling and go back in time before the time Einstein published his wrong theory and correct it. It is that simple. But we still the same e is mc square, therefore the CERN discovery is tainted. What this tell you is that Einstein is wright and is so for the enternity.

Dave, what are you on today? Nothing in your comment is true, here is the excerpt:
” a neutrino beam was shot 454 miles from the area around Geneva to Italy and arrived 60 nanoseconds earlier than light would. “

your speculations appear to be correct. This is something worth looking in further. It is worth of mentioning that the Earth surface is not subject to Universe expansion, therefore the origin and the target are in a fixed position. What is your theory if the beam was directed to a collector located on the Space Station (as in fact it was)?
There are some experiments run by the US-Japan team and that experiments are worth of looking into.

Yes, “60 ns earlier” is correct “60 ns faster than light” is not. Earlier is time, faster is speed. They are different things. Also, that wasn’t today, it was several days ago. That is also a measure of time. And I was only on caffeine and weed and maybe some whiskey.

Forget about reverse time travel because it can’t be done,but what about the possibility of forward time travel (without really doing it) ,e.g.: person A says goodby to person B and gets into a device that can circle the earth close to the speed of light for one week. When he stops person A’s clock will indicate one week has passed while person B’s clock will  indicate, lets say, ten years. So B has aged 10 years but A has only aged 1 week, so what has happened ?, not much, Person A has moved forward 10 years in B’s world but only 1 week in A’s world. Remember time is relative and therefore nothing has really changed.

Why, specifically should particles traveling faster than the speed of light imply traveling backward in time is possible?

Those little guys in the discs have been doing it for years the question becomes how do they do that, you need more research on a crashed one its there already and fully devolped it just needs to be understood