Amazement As Speed Of Light Is Broken... Was Einstein Wrong?

[The One]

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab think they may have proved Albert Einstein's theory of relativity wrong - by breaking the speed of light.



Experts at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN)http://public.web.cern.ch/public/ in Switzerland believe they have clocked neutrinos travelling fast enough to shatter the central pillar of physics.

But they cannot quite believe it themselves, they say, because according to Einstein's famous 1905 equation, E=mc2, it is simply impossible.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN.

Mr Gillies said the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

It's a shock. It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true.

Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke

They are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they have done and really scrutinise it in great detail," he said.

Ideally they want someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements, he said.

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

"It is a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva.

"It is going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it is 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.



Others were sceptical about CERN's claim that the neutrinos - one of the strangest known particles in physics - were observed smashing past the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792km 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 (730km) away in Italy travelled 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 were 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 CERN researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.

http://news.sky.com/home/technology/article/16075434

[Adi]

I don't think people realize the magnitude of this finding or announcement, I believe that this is the start of many startling, so called "discoveries", that are going to be announced in the public arena.

Like seriously people, this is incredible, it may just verify what we have read and watched over the last number of years on conspiracy forums and videos.

Adi

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by Adi
Like seriously people, this is incredible, it may just verify what we have read and watched over the last number of years on conspiracy forums and videos.

Verify what exactly?

[dreamer]

that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters


(geeze I can't spell)

[DoubleHelix]

I've always thought that the speed of thought was faster than that of light -- even though some consider thoughts to be electric impulses that take time to process, I'm thinking if you had two individuals thousands of light years apart on separate planets, one could contact the other by means of thought and touch base instantaneously!

Also, the hypothetical particle known as Tachyons supposedly break the speed-light barrier, though not proven, still an interesting theory to bandy about.

[greybeard]

David Sereda and other scientists have been saying that for years.
The simple truth is that we live in consciousness universe and the speed of one mind to another accross great distances is instant.
Remote viewing a similar case in point.
David Wilcock in a recent video claims that the energy of the remote viewer registers in the place that the viewing occurs and distance is totally irrelevant.
Science makes the mistake of wanting proof of everything even that which is obvious.
Nassim Haramein also has said the collider is looking for that which can not be found---- infinity. (the smallest particle)

Chris

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by dreamer (here)
that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters

The possible finding of an neutrino going 0.00000006 seconds faster then a photon over a given distance, that we should be treating with serious skepticism at this point, adds credibiliy to the claim that 'TPTB' have superluminal technology?

What do you mean by 'adds credibility'? (provides evidence for? supports? makes it sound a bit less crazy?)

What do you mean by 'superluminal technology'?

[aranuk]

Posted by dreamer (here)
that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters


(geeze I can't spell)

Hi Dreamer you only had one spell mistake. Remember what Mark Twain said about it. He said "I don't give a damn for those who can only spell something ONE WAY"!

Stan

[Adi]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by Adi (here)
Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

[The One]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

Posted by Adi (here)
Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

please do not make this thread a troll.Why dont you pm the member you seem to be having a tick for tack moment.Lets get back on topic

[dreamer]

just simply that if verified, it would prove the theory of "faster than light" is possible... Contrary to einstein's theory, that's all.

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by The One (here)

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

Posted by Adi (here)
Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

please do not make this thread a troll.Why dont you pm the member you seem to be having a tick for tack moment.Lets get back on topic

I ain't trollin. I'm not having a 'tick for tack moment'. My post was completely on topic.

Sorry if logical thinking ruins all of your wonderful 'science was wrong, we were right' moment.

I wont bother anymore.

[Hervé]

So much noise about nuttin'...
C in E=MC^2 is supposed to be a constant... which it isn't except arbitrarily.

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

That's called "refration" of light through a prism. Therefore, per the computed laws of refraction:

Refraction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Light on air–plexi surface in this experiment mainly undergoes refraction (lower ray) and to a lesser extent reflection (top ray).

Refraction is the change in direction of a wave due to a change in its speed. This is most commonly observed when a wave passes from one medium to another at any angle other than 90° or 0°. Refraction of light is the most commonly observed phenomenon, but any type of wave can refract when it interacts with a medium, for example when sound waves pass from one medium into another or when water waves move into water of a different depth. Refraction is described by Snell's law, which states that the angle of incidence θ1 is related to the angle of refraction θ2 by
where v1 and v2 are the wave velocities in the respective media, and n1 and n2 the refractive indices. [...]

From the prism experiment, one can therefore deduce that violet and red are travelling at different speed... violet an UV being the "fastest" in that spectrum.

Therefore anything having a higher frequency/speed than UV is FTL... by definition!

So, I guess that a neutrino would go straight through the base of the above prism.

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

Nothing could go faster than the speed of light unless it already was. It was the barrier that was the problem.

[Hervé]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

Nothing could go faster than the speed of light unless it already was. It was the barrier that was the problem.

Arbitrary barrier to an increase in frequency.

[TWINCANS]

Maybe Einstein's theory was correct - but only for the 3D dimensional reality. Perhaps there are different laws of physics for different dimensions...

[Agape]

See that essentially ..energy in the universe 'predates' light . What we refer to as light is just one of the forms of energy .

Before the Universe in its current form came to being ( which is ver relative statement of its own ) there was tremendous number of energy bound to various centers of gravity that eventually created what is known as 'mass' .
The same ocean of primordial energy waves was marked by polarities , positive and negative waves and through their mutual interaction particles and energy clusters were born as well as repulsive forces .
Now , in this primordial soup ..the variation of energy centers was rather huge and each of them later gave birth to millions of stars.

Each of those energy clusters created unique physical properties in their center , different frequencies of light, different particles and total of their energy determined the speed of their 'light emition' later as well because energy was bound by gravity in every particular system its own way .

So what you call 'light speed' in this solar system is no way valid for 'all the Universe' .

In fact , even a light /energy travelling from distant galactic center and entering here has good chance of being 'trapped' to local energy grid .


And..there's still lots of 'free energy' travellling in space , for example neutrinos ..they are likely remains of the primordial soup of free energy not bound to gravity centres .

[Ilie Pandia]

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
So much noise about nuttin'...
C in E=MC^2 is supposed to be a constant... which it isn't except arbitrarily.

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

Wow Amzer.

That's pretty interesting stuff. I do not trust Wikipedia that much when it comes to the laws of physics. It seems they have some contradictions on the site.

They claim nothing can go faster than the speed of light (not even information!) And the there is the page about refraction... that you have quoted:

At the boundary between the media, the wave's phase velocity is altered, usually causing a change in direction. Its wavelength increases or decreases but its frequency remains constant.

Well, if that is true, with a sufficient number of incremental increases in wave length, while keeping the frequency constant... you can easily go beyond the unbreakable barrier of speed of light.

So this begs the question... when you say "speed of light" what "light" do you mean? What kind of radiation and at what frequency?! Is UV light? IR light?

In school we learn about this "Constant" speed of light. And then we see the Sun rise not being white! They explain: "because different frequencies of light travel at different speeds, therefore the violet light gets here first!" Wow... so is it constant or not!? What speed has the light beyond UV light then?

I am pretty sure I've made an error somewhere in my understanding of this "speed of light" but I can't seem to pin point it. But if the Wikipedia can be trusted.. then those 60ns (+/10ns) is no big deal!

[johnf]

So it's six nanoseconds faster, and it takes a huge complicated facility to produce it.
This sounds like an artificially small drip of info.
In this thread are numerous statements that theoretically expose the limit of the speed of light as a farce. If they already have technology that harness the real potential of FTL and free energy. To let it out at full flow would be a catastrophe to social control, as my friend Brianen states, the PTB owe me a ufo, and a replicator.