In 2011, the OPERA experiment mistakenly reported neutrinos appearing to travel faster than light. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly Very probably is an anomaly, I go not treat this now, but the physics say then that cannot to be true and that it’s against measures of the “theoretical physicist at CERN, believed it difficult to reconcile the OPERA results with the SN 1987A observations” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly In all this explanations and beliefs they forget that light is a wave and neutrino is matter, waves travel at a constant speed in an environment but matter can travel at different speeds (maybe c is the maximum speed). So “believed it difficult to reconcile the OPERA results with the SN 1987A observations” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly is only a lie probably subjective by their belief. Matter can travel at different speeds, so it’s completely probably and reconcile that any neutrinos travel at different speed. Really they say the same and not sure the real speed: “The delay of Icarus "only" 0.3 ns +-4ns +- 9ns (though still "in favor" of neutrinos), still leaves a large randomness of uncertainty about what the neutrinos have approached the speed of light” - http://marius-gravity.blogspot.com.es/2012/04/opera-phantom.html They use average “measured proton pulses to get an average distribution in time of the individual protons in a pulse.” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly because really each neutrino has a different speed, like “each of which traveled with a slightly different speed!” in http://profmattstrassler.com/articl...cillations/velocity-differences-of-neutrinos/ So it’s necessary to say that light in a environment travel at constant speed (is a wave) but neutrinos have different speeds (is a particle and by that is matter). Also we need to consider that we have not a supernova to proof the speed, only can accelerate in accelerator, by that is probably that in supernova, accelerator, Sun, … can have different speeds. Supernova 1987A – “thus 1.000000002 times the speed of light. This value was obtained by comparing the arrival times of light and neutrinos. The difference of approximately three hours was explained by the circumstance, that the almost noninteracting neutrinos could pass the supernova unhindered while light required a longer time” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurements_of_neutrino_speed , quicker but always with explanation to all against their ideas Good, good, all time with subjective for explain the things without contradict the loved theory. The neutrinos also are curved by gravity like the light and light and neutrinos start in same point. Light not travel from the backside of the supernova and by that this affirmation is totally false. Really I would obtain other probabilities in the Supernova: 1 – Maybe that the light in vacuum not be the maximum speed and that light travel more speed in other environment, so the neutrinos not exceed light speed but exceeding the light speed in vacuum. 2 - Really neutrinos exceed light speed, this is according to the Opera experiment and also very probably also according to the Icarus that also is not sure that exceed or not light speed. 3 – Other probabilities but not false solutions. Maybe that boot neutrinos from accelerator and supernova are according to light speed but not with lies. Really the value of Supernova 1987A and experiments are very reconciling against that say subjective scientists. The result in supernova only is less that light speed with that explanation without any evidence and against any proof and physic. In same form that they explain the reconcile of Supernova 1987A and light speed you could reconcile everything. Here I’m not saying that neutrinos exceed or not light speed, is probably that light speed is more that c and by that the result are error, but treat to reconcile with lies, it’s not good and say bad of the subjective procedure. If the theory of relativity works fine or not is another team, but reject the proofs and the reality is another thing, like belief and religion. To say “theoretical physicist at CERN, believed it difficult to reconcile the OPERA results with the SN 1987A observations” only is a true lie, and more over a particle that like matter can travel at different speeds (with maximum speed or not). Good work for the science that make resigned to that people that offer the result with courage and probably errors - http://io9.com/dario-autiero/ and many more good work to the science that permit that the cowardly that work and not sign obtain the recompense. This is a very good work. A courage people is that admit the obtained result with errors or not and show them with errors or not. And after all, neutrinos can travel and really travel at different speeds, by that they speak over average. Not compare with waves that travel at constant speed in each environment (vacuum, …) . But in general good time for science. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thanks. © Luis Biarge Baldellou. - webpage :
"Very probably is an anomaly" Turns out it was a glitch in the measuring instrument. http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/neutrinos-cant-beat-light/
And the director had to step down. Still, I think it was quite brave, or foolhardy of him to announce the anomaly. At least he didn't sweep it under the rug.
Yes, also over Higgs boson, also over string theory. None of theirs until today show that a photon have mass or that a particle can expand or travel (like a wave) in all direction. Also can to be stopped: "They are so elusive that a light-year of lead, nine and one-half trillion kilometres (six trillion miles) would only stop half of the neutrinos flying through it" - http://snews.bnl.gov/popsci/neutrino.html Repeat: A wave travel at constant speed in any environment (vacuum, ...) but particles can travel at any speed less of maximum speed.
