# Thread: Update: Neutrinos Traveling Faster Than Light (NOT!)

1. ## Update: Neutrinos Traveling Faster Than Light (NOT!)

Excerpted from: http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php

Here's the deal: neutrinos move very very fast (at or close to light speed, at least), and the distance that they traveled in this experiment was (to a neutrino) not that far, only 450 miles. This means that in order to figure out exactly how long it takes a given neutrino to make the trip, you need to know two things very, very precisely: the distance between the two points, and the time the neutrino leaves the first point (the source) and arrives at the second point (the detector).

In the original experiment, the CERN researchers used GPS to make both the distance measurement and the time measurement. They figured out the distance down to about 20 centimeters, which is certainly possible with GPS, and since GPS satellites all broadcast an extremely accurate time signal by radio, they were also used as a way to sync the clocks that measured the neutrino's travel time. The CERN team had to account for a lot of different variables to do this, like the time that it takes for the clock signal to make it from the satellite in orbit to the ground, but they may have forgotten one critical thing: relativity.

It's All Relative
Relativity is really, really weird. It says that things like distance and time can change depending on how you look at them, especially if you're moving very fast relative to something else. In the case of the neutrino experiment, we've got two things to think about: the detectors on the ground that measure where and when the neutrinos depart and arrive, and the GPS satellites up in space that we're using as a basis for these measurements. Since the satellites are orbiting the Earth and moving way faster than the detectors, we say that they're in a different "reference frame," which just means that the motion of the satellites is significantly different than the motion of the Earth.

Part of the deal with relativity is that neither of these reference frames are the "correct" one. From our perspective here on Earth, the satellites are whizzing around in orbit at about 9,000 miles per hour. But the perspective of the satellites, the Earth is whizzing around just as fast, and the difference in velocities between these two reference frames is large enough that some strange things start to happen.

(So RT is preserved - by RT itself - Mal)

2. If this is the final word, and it looks like probably is... it's still a cool expiriment.

3. You're joking! The world's most brilliant physicists perform the most complex series of experiments in history and they forget about relativity!

If only Einstein was around for this. I'm sure he would thoroughly enjoy it.

4. Originally Posted by mal12345
Excerpted from: http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php

Here's the deal: neutrinos move very very fast (at or close to light speed, at least), and the distance that they traveled in this experiment was (to a neutrino) not that far, only 450 miles. This means that in order to figure out exactly how long it takes a given neutrino to make the trip, you need to know two things very, very precisely: the distance between the two points, and the time the neutrino leaves the first point (the source) and arrives at the second point (the detector).

In the original experiment, the CERN researchers used GPS to make both the distance measurement and the time measurement. They figured out the distance down to about 20 centimeters, which is certainly possible with GPS, and since GPS satellites all broadcast an extremely accurate time signal by radio, they were also used as a way to sync the clocks that measured the neutrino's travel time. The CERN team had to account for a lot of different variables to do this, like the time that it takes for the clock signal to make it from the satellite in orbit to the ground, but they may have forgotten one critical thing: relativity.

It's All Relative
Relativity is really, really weird. It says that things like distance and time can change depending on how you look at them, especially if you're moving very fast relative to something else. In the case of the neutrino experiment, we've got two things to think about: the detectors on the ground that measure where and when the neutrinos depart and arrive, and the GPS satellites up in space that we're using as a basis for these measurements. Since the satellites are orbiting the Earth and moving way faster than the detectors, we say that they're in a different "reference frame," which just means that the motion of the satellites is significantly different than the motion of the Earth.

Part of the deal with relativity is that neither of these reference frames are the "correct" one. From our perspective here on Earth, the satellites are whizzing around in orbit at about 9,000 miles per hour. But the perspective of the satellites, the Earth is whizzing around just as fast, and the difference in velocities between these two reference frames is large enough that some strange things start to happen.

(So RT is preserved - by RT itself - Mal)
Okay, so instead of picking apart the errors in the latest CERN experiment, what can be done to ensure the next experiment produces better results?

Surely there is some answer, maybe not a perfect one, but the road to progress at this level of competition is defined by small incremental forward steps at times until the desired result is finally achieved...

Good stuff to ponder on, thanks!

-Alex

5. Originally Posted by Halla74
Okay, so instead of picking apart the errors in the latest CERN experiment, what can be done to ensure the next experiment produces better results?

Surely there is some answer, maybe not a perfect one, but the road to progress at this level of competition is defined by small incremental forward steps at times until the desired result is finally achieved...

Good stuff to ponder on, thanks!

-Alex
You sound like a type 3. You DEFINITELY sound like a type 3: "produce better results," "competition," "desired result is achieved."

I'm not picking on you or "trolling" you, but I've been reading your posts for some time now. And if you're not a 3w2...

As for the article, the Italian physicists were not mindful of the effects of relativity in making their calculations. As physicists, they should have known better!

You're welcome, and thanks to your positive feedback I'll likely post more interesting tidbits like this one in the future.

6. I should mention that gravitational anomalies may also be a factor:

This is a picture of the Earth depicting differences in the force of gravity on the surface.

7. Originally Posted by mal12345
You sound like a type 3. You DEFINITELY sound like a type 3: "produce better results," "competition," "desired result is achieved."
WOW! That is quite funny! I'm type 7w8 sx/so, actually.

Most likely the nature of what I do for a living has made me more centered on performance and metrics than your typical 7w8 would be.

"Engineer the most efficient and effective workflow, re-engineer dysfunctional workflows, optimize workflow and process flow systems," all of which is impossible without metrics, these are the things I do at the office everyday. This type of thinking was not "sexy" to me when I first had to learn it, but once I got it under my belt I appreciated what it can do when applied in the real world. Then I got back on my motorcycle and started hauling ass around town again.

For the last 17 years my occupation has been centered around software systems engineering, business analysis, health & human services policy development and program implementation analysis, setting capitation rates for HMOs, and contract management/project management.

But, all that hubbub aside, I'm a wild and crazy MoFo, believe it.

Originally Posted by mal12345
I'm not picking on you or "trolling" you, but I've been reading your posts for some time now. And if you're not a 3w2...
I know you're not picking on me or trolling me, no worries. It's likely that your typing ability is skewed due to our interacting via the Interwebz. Lack of non-verbal cues takes away huge elements of an individual's personality, don't you think?

It's interesting for me to hear your perception of me; no one has ever asked me if I'm Type 3 or 3w2 before. I'll film a video clip of myself soon just for kicks. Let me know what you think about that when it's up, Ok?

Originally Posted by mal12345
As for the article, the Italian physicists were not mindful of the effects of relativity in making their calculations. As physicists, they should have known better!
Muhahhaaa.
I love it when those who are so smart make the silliest errors upfront due to lack of a common sense "litmus test" of their entire model.
Whenever anything of this scale is pulled off, one or models should be built as a proof of concept. Then, those models should be opened up to people outside of the model's engineers and opened up for critical feedback. It's a hell of alot less expensive to find glaring flaws upfront that it is to blow an entire experiment of this scale. No one, especially the architect of a scientific project like this, will see all the flaws of their own creation. It is only natural, but it is not the most sensible or business savvy thing to do.

Originally Posted by mal12345
You're welcome, and thanks to your positive feedback I'll likely post more interesting tidbits like this one in the future.
Absolutely, thanks very much for your reply, both regarding your perception of my Enneagram type and for expanding on your original post. I hope you do post more stuff like this in the future. I saw a newsclip about the initial experiment results but never did see the conclusion, so this has given me "closure" (LOL!) as to how things at CERN really went.

Have a great day!

-Alex

8. Originally Posted by Halla74
WOW! That is quite funny! I'm type 7w8 sx/so, actually.

Most likely the nature of what I do for a living has made me more centered on performance and metrics than your typical 7w8 would be.

"Engineer the most efficient and effective workflow, re-engineer dysfunctional workflows, optimize workflow and process flow systems," all of which is impossible without metrics, these are the things I do at the office everyday. This type of thinking was not "sexy" to me when I first had to learn it, but once I got it under my belt I appreciated what it can do when applied in the real world. Then I got back on my motorcycle and started hauling ass around town again.

For the last 17 years my occupation has been centered around software systems engineering, business analysis, health & human services policy development and program implementation analysis, setting capitation rates for HMOs, and contract management/project management.

But, all that hubbub aside, I'm a wild and crazy MoFo, believe it.

I know you're not picking on me or trolling me, no worries. It's likely that your typing ability is skewed due to our interacting via the Interwebz. Lack of non-verbal cues takes away huge elements of an individual's personality, don't you think?

It's interesting for me to hear your perception of me; no one has ever asked me if I'm Type 3 or 3w2 before. I'll film a video clip of myself soon just for kicks. Let me know what you think about that when it's up, Ok?

Muhahhaaa.
I love it when those who are so smart make the silliest errors upfront due to lack of a common sense "litmus test" of their entire model.
Whenever anything of this scale is pulled off, one or models should be built as a proof of concept. Then, those models should be opened up to people outside of the model's engineers and opened up for critical feedback. It's a hell of alot less expensive to find glaring flaws upfront that it is to blow an entire experiment of this scale. No one, especially the architect of a scientific project like this, will see all the flaws of their own creation. It is only natural, but it is not the most sensible or business savvy thing to do.

Absolutely, thanks very much for your reply, both regarding your perception of my Enneagram type and for expanding on your original post. I hope you do post more stuff like this in the future. I saw a newsclip about the initial experiment results but never did see the conclusion, so this has given me "closure" (LOL!) as to how things at CERN really went.

Have a great day!

-Alex
Of course, the story is no longer newsworthy when the truth comes out that the thrill factor of an "exciting new discovery" is gone. I first read about the original "discovery" on the ScienceNOW facebook page, before seeing it posted here. Yesterday I posted the OP article to their wall, and someone deleted it. I just looked at their page and it doesn't look like the ScienceNOW people are going to post anything about the new findings.

Since you're a body-builder like the guy in this youtube video, I'd like to ask if you could type him for me. I have only guesses.

9. Originally Posted by mal12345
Of course, the story is no longer newsworthy when the truth comes out that the thrill factor of an "exciting new discovery" is gone. I first read about the original "discovery" on the ScienceNOW facebook page, before seeing it posted here. Yesterday I posted the OP article to their wall, and someone deleted it. I just looked at their page and it doesn't look like the ScienceNOW people are going to post anything about the new findings.
What a bunch of sensationalist sissies.

Originally Posted by mal12345
Since you're a body-builder like the guy in this youtube video, I'd like to ask if you could type him for me. I have only guesses.
(1) I don't try to type people, whether via MBTI or Enneagram. I've learned about it for purposes of self discovery, and as a means of identifying how I could improve my style of communication with other people.

(2) I have sent the following online tests to all my friends and family so that I could find out what their MBTI/Enneagram types are, just out of curiousity:

Thompson-Maidenbaum Personality Inventory:
http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore/inventory.html

SimilarMinds.com Enneagram (Short/50 Question) Test:
http://similarminds.com/test.html

Of course, at the time I had formulated guesses as to what MBTI/Enneagram type each of my relatives/friends were.
Guess what?
I was wrong every time.
That's one reason why I don't try to type people.

(3) Here's another reason I don't try to type people. At this point I know several groups of people who all share the sameMBTI type.
Guess what?
Each of them is unique as night and day.
Even within a given MBTI/Enneagram type - there is ALOT of variation, so much that I feel knowing their MBTI/Enneagram type is only of limited value.

(4) I don't judge or like to be judged, and I read way too many posts on this forum where someone has read a few articles on some typological methodology and all of a sudden thinks they know everything about all of mankind, or just as bad, makes sweeping generalization (usually negative and derogatory) about people of certain MBTI/Enneagram types. I think it's much more important to interact with others according to your real world experience with them, and how they personify and carry out the core values that guide them through their lives.

(5) Here's what I can tell you about the gentleman in the video.

(a) He's one big motherfucker with less than 8% bodyfat.

(b) I think his hat is silly. If he's bald he should just show off the chrome dome.

(c) His backyard (or wherever he is filming the clip from) is pretty pimped out. He has what appear to be several mature specimens of Australian Tree Ferns, or maybe even Queen Sago Plams (which are actually Cycads, species of plants that have been around since the dinosaurs walked the Earth), in addition to several other varieties of smaller, yet very mature ground level ferns.

(d) Because of the vegetation he is either in a tropical/subtropical climate, as none of those plants do well in areas that have a "hard freeze" each winter. The only other option would be if the entire backyard were enclosed in a massive greenhouse, but that's not very likely considering the expense to create such a facility for non-commercial purposes.

(e) His guidance regarding the exercises is sound. It never ceases to amaze me at how many weightlifters I've worked with in my life, who have been doing a bunch of different exercises for many years, and that they still don't know exactly what the kinesiology behind them is.

(f) He appears to be putting alot of effort into maintaining a neutral tone of voice. I don't know if this is because he wishes to convey a demeanor that is more low key for purposes of filiming an instructional video, or if he has some other reason behind it.

(g) Based on how he said "Auf Wiedersehen" he is not a native speaker of the German language. I grew up in Germany, I spoke German before I spoke English, and to this day if I speak German, I sound like a local from Rheinland-Pfalz. This guy's German pronounciation and vocal inflection are typical of someone who spoke English before they learned German. He is not able, or not willing to engage in releasing the language with the sharp inflection it is known for.

(h) Outside of these basic observations, I have no judgements of this man. I think it's cool that he's taken time out of his life to educate others interested in weightlifting/bodybuilding as to how to further their progress.

If you have any other questions please let me know.

Just out of curiousity:

(A) What type (MBTI/Enneagram) do you think he is?

(B) Why?

(C) What is the importance of knowing such information to the casual observer of this person?

-Alex

10. @Halla74

You certainly have a great communication style. (You are a type 3 in wanting to perfect all such elements of your personal appearance.) I usually shy away from longer posts but I found yours quite enlightening and non-egotistical. When it's 100% substance, it means I don't have to waste time wading through ego traps to try to find the substance.

If you were wrong about everybody else's type then you are probably wrong about your own. I know most people hate when I say that, but your type 3-ness comes across very powerfully to me. Okay, I'll admit that so far you're only a type 3 over the internet.

Scooby is quite strange but also very smart about weight-lifting. Sometimes he treats his personal opinion on the subject as fact, but he does it in such a calm way that no offense can be taken. I'd have to say he is a type 9. But he also uses a type 3 appearance orientation, as you pointed out when you talked about his controlled tone of voice.

One thing I noticed about his teaching technique is that it is extremely detailed. He will instruct on good form in doing overhead flies. But when he does so, he tells you to grimace while lifting, then he demonstrates how to grimace while lifting, and explains that grimacing is very useful for weight training. I have never seen anything like that on anybody else's weight-training videos.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO