# The speed of light may have been broken.

I haven't read the paper bro. I became confused when someone said the Opera neutrinos traveled through rock faster than light could possibly...travel through rock. :bugeye:

Indeed?

That made me wonder if it was a violation of c or just a violation of light-speed through a medium.

What is "a violation of c"? Are you letting your armchair post again in your place?

Light through a medium does not travel at c.

Refine your statement RJbeery. You will need to. A vacuum is a medium.

I think what you mean is ''different mediums''.

Light through a medium does not travel at c.

That was not the question, the question was : What is "a violation of c"?
As an aside, what made you think that the authors would consider light traveling through rock in their experiment?

When I said:
RJBeery said:
That made me wonder if it was a violation of c or just a violation of light-speed through a medium.
What I meant by "through a medium" is something other than a vacuum. In this case, rock. If you think it's odd to consider the speed of light through rock I would agree with you, which is why I looked at this person in a strange way when they made this comment. What I meant by "violation of c" is that something is able to travel faster than c (or possibly faster and slower than c), as is normally prohibited in Relativity.

Apparently the neutrinos have been measured to move faster than light would for the same distance through a vacuum, then? There's a fine line between either of you asking for clarification because you are confused, and simply being pedantic.

When I said:

What I meant by "through a medium" is something other than a vacuum. In this case, rock. If you think it's odd to consider the speed of light through rock I would agree with you, which is why I looked at this person in a strange way when they made this comment. What I meant by "violation of c" is that something is able to travel faster than c (or possibly faster and slower than c), as is normally prohibited in Relativity.

Apparently the neutrinos have been measured to move faster than light would for the same distance through a vacuum, then? There's a fine line between either of you asking for clarification because you are confused, and simply being pedantic.

Who are you referring to being pedantic, me or tach?

The jury is still out. Tach being pedantic is a given. I can see why you may have been genuinely confused by my meaning in post #562, but I felt that the context of previous posts made it clear. Perhaps I should've said
RJBeery said:
That made me wonder if it was a violation of c or just a violation of calculated light-speed through a given medium.

The jury is still out. Tach being pedantic is a given. I can see why you may have been genuinely confused by my meaning in post #562, but I felt that the context of previous posts made it clear. Perhaps I should've said

Right, yes.

Tach is very pedantic and I find some of his posts a little incomprehensible.

Light through a medium does not travel at c.

Here we go again. When you say medium, I take it you are talking about anything that is transparent to light? What happens when light travels through a transparent medium is that it gets absorbed by atoms and then gets readmitted. The actual photon always travels at c when it travels. But getting absorbed and admitted is what causes it to take longer traveling through a medium.

On the other hand a neutrinos rarely interact with any matter and when they do they don't get absorbed and readmitted. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here?

KJK, I'm not trying to make controversial pronouncements. If you read all of my posts hopefully you'll see that I was only trying to clear up a confusing comment made to me by someone (in person) regarding Opera's neutrinos.

Here we go again. When you say medium, I take it you are talking about anything that is transparent to light? What happens when light travels through a transparent medium is that it gets absorbed by atoms and then gets readmitted. The actual photon always travels at c when it travels. But getting absorbed and admitted is what causes it to take longer traveling through a medium.

On the other hand a neutrinos rarely interact with any matter and when they do they don't get absorbed and readmitted. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here?

As much as I appreciate your comedy like responses here and please, take this as a compliment first, I do believe RJbeery is being misunderstood. I read most of his posts previous to mine questioning the medium reference and I do believe he knows what he means, he just didn't articulate it to the best standards, which is appreciable. Not many can.

Absolutely!.., or not!

Here is a link to the arxiv preprint of the new paper, Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the*OPERA detector in the CNGS beam*

And not I have not read I yet, but if the info from the press release and abstract hold up, it does toss a monkey wrench into things.

I do appreciate that they made some refinements and redid the experiment. However, it was the same group of people that ran it again. I won't start getting much of a warm fuzzy until another group of scientists run the experiment and get the same results.

As much as I appreciate your comedy like responses here and please, take this as a compliment first, I do believe RJbeery is being misunderstood. I read most of his posts previous to mine questioning the medium reference and I do believe he knows what he means, he just didn't articulate it to the best standards, which is appreciable. Not many can.

Agreed, I was just nit picking a bit. But sometimes a little nit picking is called for and can lead to some interesting comments, and sometimes not.

Agreed, I was just nit picking a bit. But sometimes a little nit picking is called for and can lead to some interesting comments, and sometimes not.

Ok, but be careful - a little nit-picking can be a crusade to many.

Deal with the question at hand. Be a true scientist and deal with not only the question, but the right time to let it drop my friend.

God fixes the speed of light.

God fixes the speed of light.

God can fix anything, if you believe in a superintelligence.

God fixes the speed of light.

How many gods does it take to fix the speed of light?

I do appreciate that they made some refinements and redid the experiment. However, it was the same group of people that ran it again. I won't start getting much of a warm fuzzy until another group of scientists run the experiment and get the same results.

The way I understand the current paper, this experimental run was intended as a proof of concept, for a refinement of the original experiment.

It was a short experimental run with specific refinements, predominately shortening the neutrino bursts to 3 ns (?) and intended to test the experimental design. I believe it is to be repeated over a longer time frame early next year. And it already sounds like there are plans to reproduce it, in both the US and Japan.

The new design does eliminate at least some of the criticisms of the earlier results.

faster-than-light result reproduced. this is getting very real.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/17/8866223-faster-than-light-neutrinos-pass-test

"Researchers say new tests have confirmed earlier indications that neutrinos can travel faster than light, but not everyone is convinced."

Yes, posted.

It still has a lot of room for errors.

I'm not that bothered about their speed TBH, I find Neutrinos interesting for many other reasons. I think that they are our link to Dark Matter.