# Scientists claim to have broken the absolute speed barrier



## Deleted_171835 (Sep 22, 2011)

GENEVA (AP) -- A pillar of physics - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - appears to be smashed by an oddball subatomic particle that has apparently made a giant end run around Albert Einstein's theories.

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab said Thursday they have clocked neutrinos traveling faster than light. That's something that according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity - the famous E (equals) mc2 equation - just doesn't happen.

"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. The organization, known as CERN, hosted part of the experiment, which is unrelated to the massive $10 billion Large Hadron Collider also located at the site.

Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

"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," he said Thursday.

Scientists at the competing Fermilab in Chicago have promised to start such work immediately.

"It's a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva. "It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true."

The Chicago team had similar faster-than-light results in 2007, but those came with a giant margin of error that undercut its scientific significance.

Other outside scientists expressed skepticism at CERN's claim that the neutrinos - one of the strangest well-known particles in physics - were observed smashing past the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792 kilometers per second).

University of Maryland physics department chairman Drew Baden called it "a flying carpet," something that was too fantastic to be believable.

CERN says 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, making the difference statistically significant. But given the enormous implications of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there was no flaws in the experiment.

"We have not found any instrumental effect that could explain the result of the measurement," said Antonio Ereditato, a physicist at the University of Bern, Switzerland, who was involved in the experiment known as OPERA.

The researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.[/p]

If this turns out to be confirmed, it would cast a lot of what was done in the last hundred years in a whole new light and would bring about a very big flaw in Einstein's theory.





Source


----------



## awssk8er (Sep 22, 2011)

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real"

Kinda how I feel about this right now... I just read a book on the Theory of Relativity too... so I find this hard to believe but interesting.


----------



## chyyran (Sep 22, 2011)

E=/=mc2?

I'm reminded of that scene in Transformers 2 when Sam goes OVER9000 and recalculates the theory of Relativity because of some Energon thing.
Michael Bay 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Also, I'm scared of the experiments the guys do at CERN and the LHC. You do realize they really make miniature black holes in there?


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 22, 2011)

I'm certainly no physicist, but if this is true, could it not open up the theoretical possibility of time travel, again? 

Perhaps I don't understand it perfectly, but it was explained to me that the light-speed barrier was what shot down most theories relating to time-travel.

EDIT: Hey! There's FAST. Perfect timing.


----------



## Veho (Sep 22, 2011)

ron975 said:
			
		

> You do realize they really make miniature black holes in there?


You do realize they're _miniature_? You're so scared of the words "black hole" you're forgetting everything else. Black holes are "dangerous" because of their gravity. The gravity comes from mass. The black holes created by the LHC are less massive (and therefore less dangerous) than a grain of sand. Are you scared of sand?


----------



## chyyran (Sep 22, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> I'm certainly no physicist, but if this is true, could it not open up the theoretical possibility of time travel, again?
> 
> Perhaps I don't understand it perfectly, but it was explained to me that the light-speed barrier was what shot down most theories relating to time-travel.
> 
> ...


The difference is those "grains of sands" are much much more dense than regular sand.


----------



## weiff (Sep 22, 2011)

If Einstein were still alive he would probably be one of the first to point out that the "theory of relativity" is exactly that.... a theory. There was not a large amount of qualifying evidence to support it until log after it was adopted. 

In fact most scientists keep crunching number to continue to prove theories are actual fact, until there is enough evidence to support or destroy it, it remains only a theory (For those not in the know... read theory as "educated guess").


I say more power to them, if they found a way to send particles faster than light then it opens up billions of new opportunities for other experimentation. 


Go unyielding science, what will you wrought?


----------



## Veho (Sep 22, 2011)

ron975 said:
			
		

> The difference is those "grains of sands" are much much more dense than regular sand.
> But their gravitational pull is proportional to their mass, not their density.
> 
> Besides, those black holes only last a few nanoseconds before they dissipate into Hawking radiation and evaporate.
> ...


A scientific theory is verifiable and supported by numbers and facts. The word you're looking for is "hypothesis". A hypothesis is an educated but unverified guess at how something works. Once the hypothesis has been confirmed through observation and experimentation, it becomes a theory. A scientific theory is pretty much verified fact. Admittedly, it's a clumsy and misleading term that has led to much debate.


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Sep 22, 2011)

This is indeed interesting and will open more windows than it closed.


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (Sep 22, 2011)

This is not good at all, Why?
If this experiment gets into the wrong hands, who knows what will happen! They'll be able to make bad things happen in the past, and kill our ancestors so we are dead! 
Unless, we still live how we are, but the person who did it gets transported to another world? It's quite confusing to me, almost as confusing to me as evolution


----------



## awssk8er (Sep 22, 2011)

ShinyJellicent12321 said:
			
		

> This is not good at all, Why?
> If this experiment gets into the wrong hands, who knows what will happen! They'll be able to make bad things happen in the past, and kill our ancestors so we are dead!
> Unless, we still live how we are, but the person who did it gets transported to another world? It's quite confusing to me, almost as confusing to me as evolution


Particles traveling faster than the speed of light =/= People being able to time travel...


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 22, 2011)

ShinyJellicent12321 said:
			
		

> This is not good at all, Why?
> If this experiment gets into the wrong hands, who knows what will happen! They'll be able to make bad things happen in the past, and kill our ancestors so we are dead!
> Unless, we still live how we are, but the person who did it gets transported to another world? It's quite confusing to me, almost as confusing to me as evolution




You do realize that we're taking about _theories_, and not Dr. Who, right?


----------



## Thesolcity (Sep 22, 2011)

_IF_ this turns out to be true (which I doubt), time travel is a possibility.


----------



## Dimensional (Sep 22, 2011)

ShinyJellicent12321 said:
			
		

> This is not good at all, Why?
> If this experiment gets into the wrong hands, who knows what will happen! They'll be able to make bad things happen in the past, and kill our ancestors so we are dead!
> Unless, we still live how we are, but the person who did it gets transported to another world? It's quite confusing to me, almost as confusing to me as evolution


That is the big question whenever you deal with time travel and paradoxes. If you do something that changes the past, does that change your own future, your own moment in time you came from, or do you just end up in an alternate future, while the future you did come from still exists but your now cut off from it?

As for traveling faster than the speed of light contributing to time travel, it requires more than just flying very very fast. You also need to have a gravitational field to literally slingshot your matter across space-time, or something that is able to bend light. Why do you think they do that in Star Trek?


----------



## Fishaman P (Sep 22, 2011)

If time travel is possible, it'll be just like Dragon Ball Z.

There will just be multiple parallel universes, and your actions during time travel will only affect that timeline.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Sep 22, 2011)

ShinyJellicent12321 said:
			
		

> This is not good at all, Why?
> If this experiment gets into the wrong hands, who knows what will happen! They'll be able to make bad things happen in the past, and kill our ancestors so we are dead!
> Unless, we still live how we are, but the person who did it gets transported to another world? It's quite confusing to me, almost as confusing to me as evolution







Not going to happen.


Spoiler



Also, evolution is understandably confusing, considering that it doesn't actually make sense.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 22, 2011)

Faster than light particles are one thing but usually such debates for me tail off into information encoding- various things have been attempted here and might have done something but being unable to encode information despite potentially being faster than light.

As for paradoxes for the sake of this argument (today at least) I am going to be of the many universes with regards to choices persuasion.

@ ShinyJellicent12321 "evolution is confusing"... two (or possibly more) organisms share some DNA to produce an offspring. Along the way the DNA occasionally gets a few random mutations (copying errors when cells divide, radiation and a few other methods) or simply via the combination of traits from the parents. Should as a result of these mutations or inheritance the offspring be somewhat stronger, faster, smarter...... without too many downsides (sometimes the new/improved traits might burn a lot of energy just by sitting there which is rare/valuable in the wild) then it is more likely to make it to the next spawning stage (or be more successful at it) and the offspring from it then (hopefully) get the stronger/faster/smarter traits and it all gets rinsed and repeated over several million years which as anybody that has taken out a loan will tell you a few percentage points (in this case in favour of the mutant) add up to a lot in the long run.
It occasionally gets tempered by other animals in the species (too strong/fast/smart or just plain different and the other species members will tend to kill it*), there are a few interesting mechanisms (recessive genes and such) and the environment comes into play (should I be adapted for hot desert survival then I will probably not do too well in an ice age should one suddenly appear) but that is just additional modelling (incredibly fascinating and valuable but still just additional stuff).

*a recent one was as screening for some aspects of autism might become available when still in the womb (with an eye towards an abortion if detected) for fear the resulting person would be not as able to function in society as they might be caused murmurs from some in the high end maths world as they have found some of their best from those with certain autistic traits. If you prefer less human oriented stuff then I overheard someone mentioning an albino seal/walrus or something recently if you fancy a search.
Edit not entirely related to the evolution bit but I found it enjoyable http://www.ted.com/talks/jack_horner_build..._a_chicken.html

Next post perhaps more on the actual topic.


----------



## T3GZdev (Sep 22, 2011)

Dimensional said:
			
		

> ShinyJellicent12321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i was thinking if you were to go back in time, the only way to change your future/present would be to go back in time, kill yourself in the past & live your life differently lol. difference would be that your using your same body.
edit: or you could send your past self into the future instead of killing, then live your life in the past then somehow all of your knowlage & changes transfers to your past self in the future.


----------



## BORTZ (Sep 22, 2011)

Anything that will help me fit my 6 foot ladder into my 4 foot barn.


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (Sep 22, 2011)

If time travel was possible, the government should hide it from people because who knows what we'll do?
The government hides lots of stuff from us, time travel could help. 
But if it was released to the public, that's not very good


----------



## person66 (Sep 23, 2011)

If time travel was made possible, don't you think someone from some time in the future would have screwed up and told someone from the past about it, which would mean that we would know that it would eventually be invented, which we don't, which probably means that it never is (invented).

lol, that was probably too confusing to understand, anyway, this will be interesting if they really have observed particles travelling faster than the speed of light.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Sep 23, 2011)

person66 said:
			
		

> If time travel was made possible, don't you think someone from some time in the future would have screwed up and told someone from the past about it, which would mean that we would know that it would eventually be invented, which we don't, which probably means that it never is (invented).
> 
> lol, that was probably too confusing to understand, anyway, this will be interesting if they really have observed particles travelling faster than the speed of light.


With time travel you can only go into the future.


----------



## ShinyJellicent12 (Sep 23, 2011)

The concept of time travel is kind of, well, complex. 
Just because it's kind of odd to disappear all of a sudden.
Where would you go? In a white place with weird squares? (from spongebob 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)
But, if someone did alter the past, wouldn't they be transported to another world? Or would the person who did get transported back to our dimension with no changes in it?
If that is true, that means there are infinite dimensions. Just because there's many people on earth and they make decisions. If they change their decision, they're in a different dimension.
(and, that didn't really make sense 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 23, 2011)

Good god.
All this because I happened to mention the correlation between the speed of light (aka *THE TOPIC*) and the possibility of time travel.


----------



## ianrulz1 (Sep 23, 2011)

how the balls did they measure this? o.0


----------



## Bladexdsl (Sep 23, 2011)

warp speed ahead!


----------



## Centrix (Sep 23, 2011)

I kinda of feel, "Like I don't care, who cares?" and "How is this gonna cause problems? for them or us?" I know I didn't have to post but, meh why not, still pretty neat though!


----------



## Nah3DS (Sep 23, 2011)

At first... everybody thought that Einstein was crazy.
This could be real.


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Sep 23, 2011)

Bladexdsl said:
			
		

> warp speed ahead!


Enter hyper-space!


----------



## Coto (Sep 23, 2011)

Perhaps this can lead to super clocked cpu speeds..


----------



## ars25 (Sep 23, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Good god.
> All this because I happened to mention the correlation between the speed of light (aka *THE TOPIC*) and the possibility of time travel.


well if any thing goes faster then the speed of light there is the possiblity of the faster moving object to create ripples in time and space hince if we find the possibilty of using this ripple we could in theory travel thought time another theory is that we create a rip in space and time then leading to the discovery of other universes and the power to time travel to any time we would think of


----------



## s4mid4re (Sep 23, 2011)

ianrulz1 said:
			
		

> how the balls did they measure this? o.0
> 
> QUOTEThis is extremely shocking: CERN scientists *using a 1300-ton particle detector* have measured particles travelling faster than the speed of light. If confirmed, this discovery could invalidate Albert Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity and revolutionize physics.


source


----------



## redact (Sep 23, 2011)

ThatDudeWithTheFood said:
			
		

> With time travel you can only go into the future.


this would be a lot less confusing if true (only time will tell - if we ever even get around to time travel, that is 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)


----------



## Bladexdsl (Sep 23, 2011)

person66 said:
			
		

> If time travel was made possible, don't you think someone from some time in the future would have screwed up and told someone from the past about it, which would mean that we would know that it would eventually be invented, which we don't, which probably means that it never is (invented).


even if it were possible it wouldn't happen it's been theorized than when you go back/forward in time your actually entering a parallel universe so you can go fuck up the timeline as much as possible and it wouldn't effect YOUR timeline. of course it's also been theorized than you will be trapped in that dimension and never be able to find your way back to yours


----------



## ars25 (Sep 23, 2011)

Bladexdsl said:
			
		

> person66 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


wow thinking about it makes me think about it is it really wourth traveling back in time if you can't return to your home sure you will make a scientific break though but is it really worth it?


----------



## Chhotu uttam (Sep 23, 2011)

Awesome!
This is gonna help us to discover more secrets of the Universe.


----------



## Necron (Sep 23, 2011)

Well, propably another group of scientist will come and say "well, they did this wrong and bla bla..." and the two groups will start fighting xd.


----------



## Nah3DS (Sep 23, 2011)




----------



## jan777 (Sep 23, 2011)

If time travel was to be possible, I thing it will only allow travel to future.

I read this one theory that when people travel at light speed, they do not age or something, so what they could do, is to travel in light speed around and around the universe (or anywhere anyway) untill the desired time is there, then stop, by then you would be in 2050 but still be 16 years old.


----------



## Gagarin (Sep 23, 2011)

Let me have my boys at the lab to confirm this....


----------



## BORTZ (Sep 23, 2011)

Coto said:
			
		

> Perhaps this can lead to super clocked cpu speeds..


Actually, yes. Eventually.


----------



## VashTS (Sep 23, 2011)

it cant be real. im on the skeptic side.

i think its more realistic that its traveling in a different dimension or bending space.


----------



## Deleted-188346 (Sep 23, 2011)

ron975 said:
			
		

> For example, if you went back in time and killed your grandparents, you'd never have been born, thus you would never have made the travel through time, since you haven't made the travel through time, you'd never shot your grandparents, and it goes on and on..


I love debating about this!

My opinion is, even if you wanted to kill your grandparents, you never could.
Since time has already passed in the period that you've travelled to, the events that led to your birth have already taken place. Including the events of your own time-travelled being. It's already happened. Just because you went back in time, doesn't mean that you're changing the past. You must have failed, or somebody lied to you about who your grandparents were.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





But, if you did succeed, that'd be like...the ultimate suicide!

I don't, however, believe that time travel is possible.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 23, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> I'm certainly no physicist, but if this is true, could it not open up the theoretical possibility of time travel, again?
> 
> Perhaps I don't understand it perfectly, but it was explained to me that the light-speed barrier was what shot down most theories relating to time-travel.
> 
> EDIT: Hey! There's FAST. Perfect timing.


Whoever explained that to you is probably wrong. Time travel is indeed theoretically possible. Objects moving through a wormhole aren't moving faster than light, rather, they are traversing a shorter distance and therefore a shorter time. It's like the displacement of a right triangle compared to its X and Y components (hypotenuse will always be shortest distance from point A to point C, just as A+B will always be larger).

As for the experiment, that'd be awesome if it were true; I want to major in physics. How awesome would it be to be a pioneer for understanding the basics? If I was good enough to be one, that is.


----------



## Thesolcity (Sep 23, 2011)

So....portals, anyone?


----------



## KingVamp (Sep 23, 2011)

Thesolcity said:
			
		

> So....portals, anyone?


I believe they have a (not "complete") form of teleportation, but things wouldn't come out the same on the other end. 

So... we are getting there.


----------



## Narayan (Sep 23, 2011)

t377y000 said:
			
		

> i was thinking if you were to go back in time, the only way to change your future/present would be to go back in time, kill yourself in the past & live your life differently lol. difference would be that your using your same body.
> edit: or you could send your past self into the future instead of killing, then live your life in the past then somehow all of your knowlage & changes transfers to your past self in the future.


this reminds me of gasai yuno.


----------



## gameandmatch (Sep 23, 2011)

Steins;Gates in real life now? Great now we are screwed.


----------



## mangaTom (Sep 23, 2011)

jan777 said:
			
		

> If time travel was to be possible, I thing it will only allow travel to future.
> 
> I read this one theory that when people travel at light speed, they do not age or something, so what they could do, is to travel in light speed around and around the universe (or anywhere anyway) untill the desired time is there, then stop, by then you would be in 2050 but still be 16 years old.


Well they do age but their concept of "time" is rather slow compared to us since when you are nearing the speed of light, time runs "slower" than usual.(I guess I read about that)

Also about paradoxes, you can always read about temporal paradox(which is the correct term) which includes the infamous grandfather paradox and also the solutions to the paradox such as timeline protection hypothesis and multiple universes hypothesis.

Off-topic: After reading the organization's name CERN, it totally reminded me of the visual novel and anime Steins;Gate which also discusses about time-travel.The antagonist organization there is named SERN which is homophonic with CERN. Lol at the coincidence.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Sep 23, 2011)

Bladexdsl said:
			
		

> warp speed ahead!



no no no, warp speed is too slow
We're gonna have to go right to....LUDICROUS SPEED!


----------



## Lacius (Sep 23, 2011)

The reason why time slows as one gets closer to the speed of light is so one cannot go faster than the speed of light. Imagine I'm on a spaceship traveling 99.999999% the speed of light, and I run forward while on the ship. Normally, the speed at which I'm running on the ship would be added to the speed my ship is going, but that would cause me to be traveling at faster than the speed of light. Physics stops me from doing that with time dilation by making me run really slowly (all of time within the ship would be going really slowly). That's why the results of this experiment are impossible.


----------



## Seaking (Sep 23, 2011)

Coto said:
			
		

> Perhaps this can lead to super clocked cpu speeds..


if you can make a CPU over clocked to the speed of light and not get it to burn the computer and your house down, i will be your slave for life.


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Sep 23, 2011)

Puppy_Washer said:
			
		

> ron975 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So do I!


I believe that time is what keeps everything in balance. If one were able to, time travel, they surely won't be able to travel to the past because of obvious reasons. Time travel to the future however, just may be possible! 
Still, my believe is that time travel is still not in the list of possibilities.



Teleportation on the other hand!

Just may be possible and even more so due to this recent discovery. My meaning to teleportation however, is not to transfer/transport one object from one location to another in an instant but rather cover a very large amount of distance within a very small margin of time.

I can see teleportation being possible in the very distant future.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Sep 23, 2011)

DiscostewSM said:
			
		

> Bladexdsl said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


teleportation is indeed possible they have already figured how to teleport light all they need to do is figure out how to do it with matter...and not end up like this


----------



## yuyuyup (Sep 23, 2011)

it's about damn time, lazyass scientists


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 23, 2011)

Lacius said:
			
		

> The reason why time slows as one gets closer to the speed of light is so one cannot go faster than the speed of light. Imagine I'm on a spaceship traveling 99.999999% the speed of light, and I run forward while on the ship. Normally, the speed at which I'm running on the ship would be added to the speed my ship is going, but that would cause me to be traveling at faster than the speed of light. Physics stops me from doing that with time dilation by making me run really slowly (all of time within the ship would be going really slowly). That's why the results of this experiment are impossible.


This is based on the assumption that the speed of light is the limit.

Einstein may be wrong in this aspect. Not all of relativity may be wrong, but this would be.


----------



## Lacius (Sep 23, 2011)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> This is based on the assumption that the speed of light is the limit.
> 
> Einstein may be wrong in this aspect. Not all of relativity may be wrong, but this would be.


All of the math says that the speed of light is the limit. The only way the speed of light could have been broken would be if neutrinos take shortcuts through space-time, which technically wouldn't be traveling faster than the speed of light.

Edit: I'm more inclined to believe that a mistake was made though.


----------



## spinal_cord (Sep 23, 2011)

If nutrenos are massless, then wouldn't this not effect anuthing at all. I'm sure that only particles with mass are impossible to accelerate to light speed, light has no trouble with it after all.


----------



## Luna (Sep 23, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> If nutrenos are massless, then wouldn't this not effect anuthing at all. I'm sure that only particles with mass are impossible to accelerate to light speed, light has no trouble with it after all.



But everything has a mass except for light.


----------



## Qtis (Sep 23, 2011)

Luna said:
			
		

> spinal_cord said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What is mass? Ladies and Gentlemen, Let me introduce the Graviton. That is a theory on how mass is "created", but what creates the graviton (which would have to be massless) in the first place? A few years ago at CERN one of the particle physicists mentioned that the graviton is something of speculation and could explain mass. But that would make the graviton massless and thus it would be relative to photons ie. light. But is that even possible?

Also regarding how particles are measured is made possible by theorizing. No one has actually seen a certain particle in real life, but by calculating the collision of two or more particles it is possible to theorize what may or may not have been the first part of the collision.

Also let me tell you that if you can answer the simple question "What is mass?", there is a nice reward available at CERN.


-Qtis

ps. So now we have microwave + telephone time machines à la Steins;Gate?


----------



## spinal_cord (Sep 23, 2011)

Also, didn't Einstein say that it is impossible for mass ti travel *at* then speed of light. At which point, the laws of physics go a little wonky. There should be nothing stopping anything travelling faster than light speed, just so long as it doesn't need to accelerate through light speed to get there. So for whatever reason, if particles are discovered to be travelling faster than light, the current laws  of phisics have no problem with that.


----------



## FireGrey (Sep 23, 2011)

They have found out how to make something move faster then light, but not how to move a person faster then light.
I don't think this is a huge milestone for time travel.
If it leads to time travel then can someone please time travel to the time i posted this and give me a 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







If it did lead to time travel though, everyone know's the government wouldn't let us touch a time machine, or even know they exist.


----------



## Qtis (Sep 23, 2011)

FireGrey said:
			
		

> They have found out how to make something move faster then light, but not how to move a person faster then light.
> I don't think this is a huge milestone for time travel.
> If it leads to time travel then can someone please time travel to the time i posted this and give me a donut
> 
> ...



Unfortunately the last statement isn't true since otherwise drugs would be banned and become unavailable for everyone. Unfortunately there are drugs around. Someone could pretty much do anything they wanted if they had a) enough money b) a place to do the experiments and c) a person/instance that lets you do things without doing anything to stop you.

Basically you could "time travel" if you go into a deep freeze (stasis?) and wait a few years and then end up being thawed. Preferably if thawing was even possible in the same way..


-Qtis


----------



## Gahars (Sep 23, 2011)

Ha ha, take that, Einstein!

If this turns out to be true, I will eagerly await the day we get a spaceship capable of lightspeed.


----------



## spinal_cord (Sep 23, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Ha ha, take that, Einstein!
> 
> If this turns out to be true, I will eagerly await the day we get a spaceship capable of lightspeed.



As far as I am aware, travelling _faster_ than light is not impossible and Einstien didn't say it was. Only travelling _at_ light speed is impossible according to him.

Also, you'll be waiting a few hundred years for that spaceship.


----------



## FireGrey (Sep 23, 2011)

I can't wait for signs saying "school zone, travel under the speed of light"


----------



## AlanJohn (Sep 23, 2011)

Time travel ftw

I dont care for paradoxes, if you change something in time it just creates a parallel-universe.


----------



## Cyan (Sep 23, 2011)

I think this is a great progress, they found a way to project something at high speed. 
It needs a good projector, and certainly a lot of energy to achieve that.

I never doubt it would be possible to travel faster than light since I learn that Photon also has a mass. 
They first discovered it when they noticed that light was changing its course when a massive star passed near the light emitter and the observer.


Note: Things bellow are only my own imagination.


Spoiler: about mass




I think that Einstein theory is that nothing can go faster than light because of the particle resistance encountered when moving at high speed (chocking between each other) due to their mass.
So light, being massless would be the faster.

But now that we know that light has a mass, anything with less mass can travel faster. 

Einstein theory/formula is still applicable, energy = mass * lightspeed²
why would something that can move at higherspeed will change the Energy formula?

Or maybe it should be E= m * speed of a massless element ²

the fact it was based on a light was only because it was the "faster one we thought", it doesn't mean that light was the correct one to use in the formula, maybe it was close enough for calculating other speed/theory but could have been wrong for years.





Spoiler: About time travel



 I think we can't go back in time, we can only make it flow at different rate, but it's still flowing (there's no forward or backward).
You can go to the future by traveling faster, but it's just your time perception (and effect ?) which became slower.

Take two persons, someone running and someone walking. They are both moving at different speed, the one running is nearer than lightspeed and thus has his time perception flowing slower, but they both existed in the same space time, none of them noticed that they went through a different time flow. At no moment the one running thought he was traveling in time because it's time perception was slower, he is not in the past because he went slower in time, he still is in the present.

This time dilatation has been verified with satellites, they always need to be resynchronized to match earth time because their own flow is slower than ours. It doesn't mean that they traveled in the future from the past because their clock show a date you already lived, they didn't miss any events from our space, didn't jump or warped.

Also, something I'm wondering, is light itself affected by the dilatation?
If time perception get slower the more you approach speed light then does speedlight (or no_mass-speed) itself equals no timeflow at all?


----------



## Gahars (Sep 23, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, obviously. That's why we get the time machine first, travel forward in time, and bring the technology back, if the laws of time travel would even allow that.

And while that might be true, it's still a momentous discovery. Even if it manages to fit within Einstein's theory, this is going to require several other theories being reworked.


----------



## FireGrey (Sep 23, 2011)

I think that time doesn't stop at light speed.
It's just something like 1 second would be EXTREMELY miniscule.
and above light speed, time gets even more miniscule.


----------



## spinal_cord (Sep 23, 2011)

Backwards time travel would be impossible using light theory because time is relative. If you travel at great speed, time will slow for YOU only. If it is possible to travel at great enough speed for time to stop or reverse, only objects within that vehicle (including the vehicle itself) would be effected. The rest of the universe would still be travelling forward in time. The only possible outcome would be that you would get younger, as would any objects you carry and of course the vehicle you are travelling in.
Taking that into account, you could not travel faster than light for a prolonged period of time because your vehicle would unbuild itself and you would get too young.


----------



## Lube_Skyballer (Sep 23, 2011)

FLUX CAPACITATOR?


----------



## FireGrey (Sep 23, 2011)

spinal_cord said:
			
		

> Backwards time travel would be impossible using light theory because time is relative. If you travel at great speed, time will slow for YOU only. If it is possible to travel at great enough speed for time to stop or reverse, only objects within that vehicle (including the vehicle itself) would be effected. The rest of the universe would still be travelling forward in time. The only possible outcome would be that you would get younger, as would any objects you carry and of course the vehicle you are travelling in.
> Taking that into account, you could not travel faster than light for a prolonged period of time because your vehicle would unbuild itself and you would get too young.


Sounds like a good solution for cancer and old age


----------



## Demonstryde (Sep 23, 2011)

Bladexdsl said:
			
		

> warp speed ahead!


sigh.... 
warp speed= star trek........
light speed= star wars.......

also the whole time travel thing has always been possible even before these particles traveled faster than light....
if i were next to a supermassive black hole, and you were here on earth, time for me would go by much slower if you were watching me from a distance, and the same would be opposite for you if i were viewing you from a distance... you would be moving very fast.... this is all due to the warping of space-time by the massive gravity of the supermassive black hole.. i would be moving into the future while still obeying E=mc2......


----------



## spinal_cord (Sep 23, 2011)

Demonstryde said:
			
		

> i would be moving into the future while still obeying E=mc2......



We're all moving into the future while still obeying E=mc2.


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 23, 2011)

ianrulz1 said:
			
		

> how the balls did they measure this? o.0



Distance/Time = Speed, AKA "Quite easily".

It doesn't completely disprove Einstein's theory. It applies only to objects with a certain mass, that being "from a wardrobe to the smallest atom", atom being the keyword. Einstein couldn't be aware of the fact that atoms may be composed of even smaller parts, much like we may not be aware that these smaller parts may be composed of even smaller parts. Neutrino's have a mass incredibly close to 0, which would be a margin of error in Einstein's times. The next generation always points and laughts at the elder one - it's a natural law.


----------



## bazzi_h (Sep 23, 2011)

El Psy Congroo!

I'm hoping a mad scientist called Okabe exists and messes with time lol!


----------



## syrusch (Sep 23, 2011)

The speed of the light in a black hole is more than 300'000Km/sec. That's not new.


----------



## Foxi4 (Sep 23, 2011)

syrusch said:
			
		

> The speed of the light in a black hole is more than 300'000Km/sec. That's not new.



Light is not a "moving body", it has no mass, thus it is not an object. A neutrino is very much an object with its own mass. The fact that light can move faster in certain circumstances is irrelevant, the neutrino still poked a hole in a fundamental theory in physics.


----------



## Veho (Sep 23, 2011)




----------



## VashTS (Sep 23, 2011)

Puppy_Washer said:
			
		

> ron975 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




if you could travel in time, you would have already done so, already known about it and the events would be playing out already. therefore its easy to say you cannot time travel backwards. if you could you would already know about it.


----------



## TheDarkSeed (Sep 23, 2011)

So if you travel faster than something it is only your perception that changes? Let's just say in theory there was this space shuttle that can travel near the speed of light and someone travels for what _they_ perceive as 9 years. and lets just say what they perceive as 9 years is actually 40,000 years for people that aren't traveling near the speed of light on what plane of speed will that person have aged? 

What does traveling through time slower mean? getting further into the future within a shorter time span?

does your body rot at the same speed as everyone else regardless of the speed you're traveling?

So many questions, so little _time_


----------



## DarkStriker (Sep 23, 2011)

Fishaman P said:
			
		

> If time travel is possible, it'll be just like Dragon Ball Z.
> 
> There will just be multiple parallel universes, and your actions during time travel will only affect that timeline.


Theories, they never end 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



What if there were never parallel universe? What if everything just turned upside down and vanished? Well =) Humans! They like those interesting theories.


----------



## Demonstryde (Sep 23, 2011)

TheDarkSeed said:
			
		

> So if you travel faster than something it is only your perception that changes? Let's just say in theory there was this space shuttle that can travel near the speed of light and someone travels for what _they_ perceive as 9 years. and lets just say what they perceive as 9 years is actually 40,000 years for people that aren't traveling near the speed of light on what plane of speed will that person have aged?
> 
> What does traveling through time slower mean? getting further into the future within a shorter time span?
> 
> ...


yes time for you would pass as normal, however if you were to view someone playing patty cake just outside of your craft, they would be going in super fast motion, and if they looked at you , you would be moving very very slowley.....


----------



## koimayeul (Sep 23, 2011)

eh even Einstein could make mistakes, human is human


----------



## shakirmoledina (Sep 23, 2011)

this is quite awesome, now to make ppl move at the speed of light

the awesome part is about the fact that einstein's theory is false or inaccurate. maybe this experiment's results are false. confirm everything!


----------



## RoyalCardMan (Sep 24, 2011)

Here is the only problem with time travel existing.

One thing is the point of how can something exist in space-time? Time is only an idea of the mind, not a fact to existance that it relates to nature itself. We use the time system made by people, but in order for time to simply go backwards, all of space-time would have to go backwards also. Now, the idea that there are multiple universes out there is a totally different thing. 

So, in order for time travel to be possible, you would need to be able to actually "rewind" space-time, and even then causing major occurances of disasters, such as gravity loss or even gravity being so massive that it causes a Black hole in the middle of the Universe.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 24, 2011)

See? Now imagine how awesome the world could have been by now had Edison not been such a fucking troll.


----------



## Deleted-188346 (Sep 24, 2011)

VashTS said:
			
		

> if you could travel in time, you would have already done so, already known about it and the events would be playing out already. therefore its easy to say you cannot time travel backwards. if you could you would already know about it.


It depends on whether you met yourself at an age where you could identify your time travelled self.
Or, whether you could convince others, or yourself, of your time travel.

But that is true. If time travel is possible, there would be a periods of time where there was evidence of time travel.

Such as...this.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Also, hundreds of time travellers would have already tried to kill Hitler.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 24, 2011)

Move over, Doctor Who.
Soon we'll all be like you.


----------



## Canonbeat234 (Sep 24, 2011)

Off-topic: 'An idea is faster than the speed of light'

On-topic: I can't argue about something I have little to no knowledge about this theory. I can give my opinion about the subject. 

For starters, scientist have been releasing new information about various attempts of surpassing the barriers of physics from extending their knowledge beyond the original comprehension of origin aka 'The Speed of Light'. The moments of enlightenment breaks through those theories of the past as achievements which gives profound intellect to the one who discovers them. Anyone who doesn't realize the achievement will not hesitate to find fault. 

In this case of the article about scientists who claims that have found a particle that travels faster than the speed of light. The real question is can they prove their discover by mathematical equations? Can they explain in depth how this was possible to begin with? They can get excited all they want too but if it can't be proven on paper nor demonstration than it leaves the moment of achievement as a talltale.

Besides, I thought a particle traveling faster than the speed of light instantly warps into another timeline or dimension due to its unstablity to exist within its velocity. *shrugs*


----------



## Demonstryde (Sep 24, 2011)

Canonbeat234 said:
			
		

> Off-topic: 'An idea is faster than the speed of light'
> 
> On-topic: I can't argue about something I have little to no knowledge about this theory. I can give my opinion about the subject.
> 
> ...


umm they did prove it.. it has been demonstrated, and it is possible because the particle is smaller than an atom and has near 0 mass , so, maybe read the article and you would have more knowledge on this theory.

edit: they proved it, and are asking others to confirm it.


----------



## Satangel (Sep 24, 2011)

Saw a documentary on this yesterday by accident, it was called Breaking Time and it was on National Geographic. It explained all this very good and I feel I really understand it now! Just so awesome, the theory of just being able to manipulate time in either way, future or past, is mind boggling. Just epic, there is nothing cooler than that. I really hope I will still be alive to see that day.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Sep 24, 2011)

tigris said:
			
		

> Move over, Doctor Who.
> Soon we'll all be like you.


But I don't wanna.


----------



## Qtis (Sep 25, 2011)

For the fun of it, I'll post this here if someone hasn't heard of it yet: Unsolved becomes solved. That is one of the interesting things when considering mathematics/problem solving..

Charge the Mass Effect Relays!


-Qtis


----------



## Narayan (Sep 25, 2011)

Qtis said:
			
		

> For the fun of it, I'll post this here if someone hasn't heard of it yet: Unsolved becomes solved. That is one of the interesting things when considering mathematics/problem solving..
> 
> Charge the Mass Effect Relays!
> 
> ...


thanks, i found it interesting. 
the moral of the story, is that some or most people are blocked by the idea of "impossible" and wouldn't dare or even try.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Oct 15, 2011)

UPDATE:



			
				Technology Review said:
			
		

> It's now been three weeks since the extraordinary news that neutrinos travelling between France and Italy had been clocked moving faster than light. The experiment, known as OPERA, found that the particles produced at CERN near Geneva arrived at the Gran Sasso Laboratory in Italy some 60 nanoseconds earlier than the speed of light allows.
> The result has sent a ripple of excitement through the physics community. Since then, more than 80 papers have appeared on the arXiv attempting to debunk or explain the effect. It's fair to say, however, that the general feeling is that the OPERA team must have overlooked something.
> Today, Ronald van Elburg at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands makes a convincing argument that he has found the error.
> First, let's review the experiment, which is simple in concept: a measurement of distance and time.
> ...



 Source


----------



## Cyan (Oct 15, 2011)

Thanks for this update.

I didn't thought about GPS position with earth movement (Italy moving toward to the source point, shorting the distance to travel by the neutrinos).
But I thought Genova was more Western than the target point in Italy, it can't "move toward".

Though, I thought it could be caused by the earth rotation speed:
Italy being nearer to equator than Switzerland, it moves faster because it's located on a higher radius from earth center.

The earth is not perfect ball, it's larger on equator. It's like a CD in a reader, the external edge travel a greater distance than the inner edge at the same laps of time. More distance in the same time = bigger speed.


Moving faster = the time perception from a viewer at this point is slower than the time on a higher latitude. Geneva would look like it have aged more than Italy, like if it was already a little in advance (in the future), so the measure would take less time to reach Italy.
Though, the most it approach the equator, and the most time effect should be applied to the traveling neutrinos too. (linear time dilatation?)

But I guess that's why they are using GPS time instead, as the GPS satellites is correcting this time's distortion automatically.


But (again), to feel this earth movement going toward the source (then shorting the distance), that would mean that the neutrino didn't felt the earth gravity and are moving freely straight, not moving with the earth movement/rotation. if it doesn't follow the earth rotation speed, it doesn't feel the time dilatation from getting near the equator.

But I don't think that time dilatation from different latitude could be as much as 64 nanosecond. the 64 nanosecond has been explained, but I think latitudes has an effect too, the same way altitude does.


----------

