PDA

View Full Version : Was Einstein Wrong?



Count Bobulescu
22-09-2011, 11:26 PM
If this turns out to be accurate it will be big. New claims from CERN.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/absolute-speed-barrier-broken-cern-claims-neutrinos-clocked-traveling-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQA5Sn9nK_story.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/post/cern-neutrinos-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQAkxBOoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/law-breaking-particle-at-cern-exceeds-the-speed-of-light/2011/09/22/gIQAOIzKoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

TotalMayhem
22-09-2011, 11:49 PM
How could he be wrong if he he never claimed to be right? ;)

sinsin
23-09-2011, 12:15 AM
We know nothing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILSyt_Hhbjg

C. Flower
23-09-2011, 12:29 AM
If this turns out to be accurate it will be big. New claims from CERN.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/absolute-speed-barrier-broken-cern-claims-neutrinos-clocked-traveling-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQA5Sn9nK_story.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/post/cern-neutrinos-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQAkxBOoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/law-breaking-particle-at-cern-exceeds-the-speed-of-light/2011/09/22/gIQAOIzKoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

Nice :)

Interesting comment there, that without a theory, it's only a measurement, not a revolution in physics...

fluffybiscuits
23-09-2011, 12:41 AM
Well according to the article its been baffling the scientists for over eighty years so what is it going to mean in the future? Well if it does shatter what we know about Einsteins theory on the speed of light all the physics books are going to have to be rewritten!

Sam Lord
23-09-2011, 12:45 AM
Is this what they call a paradigm shift?

If it helps get rid of the likes of dark matter and (god help us) "string theory" then it is to be very much welcomed.

Spectabilis
23-09-2011, 12:52 AM
http://superstringtheory.com/people/witten.html

Ah that's a pity. I liked Ed Witten and M theory

Sam Lord
23-09-2011, 02:36 AM
http://superstringtheory.com/people/witten.html



lol

Mumbo Jumbo

Skrimshander
23-09-2011, 03:35 AM
Is this what they call a paradigm shift?

If it helps get rid of the likes of dark matter and (god help us) "string theory" then it is to be very much welcomed.

isn't dark matter just a construct , or lets say a fancy patch over the fact that gravity models break down on a galactic level?

ive read of another model called mond... modified newtonian dynamics which is apparently simpler and more accurate way of tracking the orbits of stars around galactical centres...

i am very much the amateur here, i own two telescopes which i use every time (weather permitting)i can in ireland, which is not anywhere as near as much as i would like...
but on Sams point above, i read a book called "the trouble with physics!" by prof lee smolin,and in it he claims regarding string theory and the like, that if they fail to find the higgs bosson at cern then you can kiss conservatively 75% of everything since the standard model goodbye....

Count Bobulescu
23-09-2011, 05:12 AM
Nice :)

Interesting comment there, that without a theory, it's only a measurement, not a revolution in physics...

You hit on it there. Achenbach is my go to guy for a quick down and dirty on science issues. He’s also funny on many other subjects.

Count Bobulescu
23-09-2011, 05:17 AM
.
but on Sams point above, i read a book called "the trouble with physics!" by prof lee smolin,and in it he claims regarding string theory and the like, that if they fail to find the higgs bosson at cern then you can kiss conservatively 75% of everything since the standard model goodbye....

I read recently that Stephen Hawking long ago predicted that CERN would not find the Higgs Boson, and due to elimination of options/alternatives the Hawking view is becoming increasingly likely.

Thursday’s announcement was unrelated to the LHC.


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/08/23/a-higgs-setback-did-stephen-hawking-just-win-the-most-outrageous-bet-in-physics-history/

Captain Con O'Sullivan
23-09-2011, 07:00 AM
Going to hold on believing this for a while. The only thing I know of that is scientifically faster than the speed of a light is a jumpy journalist with a deadline...

sinsin
23-09-2011, 08:33 AM
Is this what they call a paradigm shift?

If it helps get rid of the likes of dark matter and (god help us) "string theory" then it is to be very much welcomed.

If true,it strengthens the possibility of other dimensions....I think,:confused:

C. Flower
23-09-2011, 12:13 PM
A different explanation, in the Guardian. And they refer to the wretched "god" particle.
As though you would go to church to find out about this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/22/faster-than-light-particles-neutrinos

Seán Ryan
23-09-2011, 01:03 PM
An amazing claim. But I'd wait for the full picture to arrive (somewhat slower than the speed of light), before we declare the last century of physics to be null and void.

It's a great pity that all the current articles on the matter contain more hyperbole than information. 60 nanoseconds is an incredibly short span of time. Temperature changes in the equipment could well account for this due to expansion or contraction indeed even the calibration equipment could be suspect with regard to this.

Just not enough information to get really excited. I take it from the way the articles are worded, that quantum tunnelling is not suspected to be responsible for this result. In truth, particles are well capable of cheating the speed limit imposed by the Theory of Relativity, they do so all the time. The articles seem to be ruling this out, though they don't directly say so. If it is the case, that these particles have somehow utilised the 6 (or one of them) curled up dimensions, that String Theory (Sorry Sam) predicts, then we may well be one step closer to developing teleportation (as mad as it sounds).

No matter what the outcome of all this, it's cool to have the world of physics excited. Much will come of it all!

fluffybiscuits
23-09-2011, 01:10 PM
If true,it strengthens the possibility of other dimensions....I think,:confused:

sinsin Im gong to throw a cat among the pigeons!

http://www.nuclecu.unam.mx/~alberto/physics/string.html


The essential idea behind string theory is this: all of the different 'fundamental ' particles of the Standard Model are really just different manifestations of one basic object: a string. How can that be? Well, we would ordinarily picture an electron, for instance, as a point with no internal structure. A point cannot do anything but move. But, if string theory is correct, then under an extremely powerful 'microscope' we would realize that the electron is not really a point, but a tiny loop of string. A string can do something aside from moving--- it can oscillate in different ways. If it oscillates a certain way, then from a distance, unable to tell it is really a string, we see an electron. But if it oscillates some other way, well, then we call it a photon, or a quark, or a ... you get the idea. So, if string theory is correct, the entire world is made of strings!

If only I was made of string! Sinsin is what you are thinking paralell universes and Hawkings folding space theories? (Im not well up on this stuff) where space is pushed together so we can travel from part to another easily! Its all strings anyways! :confused:;)

Skrimshander
23-09-2011, 07:40 PM
I read recently that Stephen Hawking long ago predicted that CERN would not find the Higgs Boson, and due to elimination of options/alternatives the Hawking view is becoming increasingly likely.

Thursday’s announcement was unrelated to the LHC.


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/08/23/a-higgs-setback-did-stephen-hawking-just-win-the-most-outrageous-bet-in-physics-history/

yeah spotted that.. my comment however was related to sams annoyance at string theory.. i read that its only still around because of campus politics, as if you werent workin in it your job opps were limited to put it nicely..
ps.. if anyone here is on facebook theres a group called serious science, where there is a facinating debate running on whether time actually exists or whether its a human construct

C. Flower
23-09-2011, 08:52 PM
yeah spotted that.. my comment however was related to sams annoyance at string theory.. i read that its only still around because of campus politics, as if you werent workin in it your job opps were limited to put it nicely..
ps.. if anyone here is on facebook theres a group called serious science, where there is a facinating debate running on whether time actually exists or whether its a human construct

This is where philosophy, cognitive science and physics collide.

I have trouble with scientists who tell me "cause might come after effect" as somewhere along the line they have lost their grip on the meaning of the words and of the fact that words have a distinct meaning in terms of denoting certain concepts. A word is not the equivalent to material reality.

Count Bobulescu
24-09-2011, 12:42 AM
More clear analysis from Achenbach.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/post/cern-neutrinos-dont-disprove-einstein/2011/09/23/gIQAmehHrK_blog.html#pagebreak

PaddyJoe
24-09-2011, 12:54 AM
Ahem...
"We don't allow faster than light neutrinos in here" said the bartender. A neutrino walks into a bar."

Spectabilis
24-09-2011, 12:58 AM
“There was a young lady named Bright,
whose speed it was faster than light
She went out one day, in a Relative way
And came home the previous night.”

PaddyJoe
24-09-2011, 01:09 AM
“There was a young lady named Bright,
whose speed it was faster than light
She went out one day, in a Relative way
And came home the previous night.”


;):D

Skrimshander
24-09-2011, 01:41 AM
This is where philosophy, cognitive science and physics collide.

I have trouble with scientists who tell me "cause might come after effect" as somewhere along the line they have lost their grip on the meaning of the words and of the fact that words have a distinct meaning in terms of denoting certain concepts. A word is not the equivalent to material reality.

when dealing in physics i wouldnt dwell on the words used. words are used to describe the mathematical constructs we dont understand..

Count Bobulescu
24-09-2011, 04:17 AM
More!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/particles-faster-than-light-revolution-or-mistake/2011/09/23/gIQArpJzqK_story.html?hpid=z2

C. Flower
24-09-2011, 08:58 AM
when dealing in physics i wouldnt dwell on the words used. words are used to describe the mathematical constructs we dont understand..

Then they should use new words, when there is new knowledge. Time, space, and cause and effect, are useful terms, reflecting some of what we know about material reality. With more knowledge, one would expect new terms to be adopted. Saying "cause comes after effect" is describing something other than (and opposite to) the cause and effect relationship and imo is just silly.

Skrimshander
24-09-2011, 10:12 AM
Then they should use new words, when there is new knowledge. Time, space, and cause and effect, are useful terms, reflecting some of what we know about material reality. With more knowledge, one would expect new terms to be adopted. Saying "cause comes after effect" is describing something other than (and opposite to) the cause and effect relationship and imo is just silly.

yes i agree with that.. but then the problem with new terms or words would be that in explaining them we d have to fall back on old ones to define them

Captain Con O'Sullivan
24-09-2011, 10:18 AM
Sometimes make up new words and slip them into conversation in the pub. Annoys mates something rotten but then they are probably just being quidipridous.

roisin
24-09-2011, 11:25 AM
Neutrino - could be negative mass?

C. Flower
24-09-2011, 11:41 AM
yes i agree with that.. but then the problem with new terms or words would be that in explaining them we d have to fall back on old ones to define them

Yes. It might take a book full of old words to define one new one.

fluffybiscuits
25-09-2011, 04:23 PM
Apparently if something is faster than the speed of light, it starts travelling back in time. But time is a human construct so therefore what would that mean if time as we know didnt exist? Just thought would wreck a few heads on a chilled out Sunday afternoon ;)/.....

random new yorker
27-09-2011, 03:58 AM
Well... this is ONE experiment that needs to be duplicated before we can take physics and Einstein apart...although it would be nice to be able to go back in time ... ..

random new yorker
27-09-2011, 04:05 AM
Neutrino - could be negative mass?

Neutrino means it is neutral, mass is almost zero...and they don't interact with matter...anyway am not a physicist...but if the experiment can be repeated it is a massive piece of data :)

fluffybiscuits
27-09-2011, 11:42 AM
Neutrino means it is neutral, mass is almost zero...and they don't interact with matter...anyway am not a physicist...but if the experiment can be repeated it is a massive piece of data :)

Well it will mean a new beginning for physics and perhaps tearing up what we know...

Starfire
27-09-2011, 12:37 PM
There are three types, or "flavors", of neutrinos: electron neutrinos, muon neutrinos and tau neutrinos. Each type also has a corresponding antiparticle, called an antineutrino - did they say which was detected?

About 65 billion (6.5×1010) solar neutrinos per second pass through every square centimeter perpendicular to the direction of the Sun in the region of the Earth.

Neutrinos do have a very small mass and are not massless

This may have implication for the detection of Super Nova as Neutrinos arrive at detectors sooner than light - can be several hours ahead from an event. ( The SNEWS project )

Trow
28-09-2011, 11:38 PM
If this turns out to be accurate it will be big. New claims from CERN.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/absolute-speed-barrier-broken-cern-claims-neutrinos-clocked-traveling-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQA5Sn9nK_story.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/post/cern-neutrinos-faster-than-light/2011/09/22/gIQAkxBOoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/law-breaking-particle-at-cern-exceeds-the-speed-of-light/2011/09/22/gIQAOIzKoK_blog.html?hpid=z2

A man has got to know his limitations. :)

I'm sure Einstein would have enjoyed that ''Eureka!'' moment.

roisin
30-09-2011, 03:48 AM
One would hope to detect the supernova by neutrino burst first, then following up with a light detection - I wonder if any observatories are set up to monitor in this way?

Could there be a relationship between neutrinos and the long theorised faster-than-light tachyon?

Starfire
30-09-2011, 03:42 PM
That Neutrinos arrive first before the light pulse ( can be several hours before, for a distant event ) and casts doubt on the light speed as absolute and poses problems for an explanation with all sorts of reasons to explain why the light pulse is delayed. It is possible the Neutrinos are travelling faster than light.

The SNEWS project is trying to detect the Neutrino burst first to provide information to point the telescopes and wait for the light pulse of the explosion.

http://snews.bnl.gov/blurb.html

roisin
01-10-2011, 11:16 AM
Some related discussion here (supernovas, tachyons, etc.)
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/victor-stenger-on-speedy-neutrinos-did-we-cause-god/

Count Bobulescu
16-11-2011, 06:31 AM
An update.

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/faster-than-light-neutrino-poses-the-ultimate-cosmic-brain-teaser-for-physicists/2011/11/09/gIQAsw9sKN_story.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/faster-than-light-neutrino-poses-the-ultimate-cosmic-brain-teaser-for-physicists/2011/11/09/gIQAsw9sKN_story.html

fluffybiscuits
16-11-2011, 10:24 AM
Thought this was a fascinating theory about what happened. Speaking about the neutrinos that were observed froma supernova, he had the following to say


Had those neutrinos been traveling at OPERA speed, they would have arrived four years earlier. (There could be a way around this hitch: Maybe the high-energy neutrinos in the lab experiment go faster than the ones from the supernova.)

Time travel !

Trow
16-11-2011, 04:08 PM
Thought this was a fascinating theory about what happened. Speaking about the neutrinos that were observed froma supernova, he had the following to say
Quote:
Had those neutrinos been traveling at OPERA speed, they would have arrived four years earlier. (There could be a way around this hitch: Maybe the high-energy neutrinos in the lab experiment go faster than the ones from the supernova.)

Time travel !

Be interested to know if these ''lab experiments'' are noting colour variations or viewing their experiments in ''different light.''

I'd suggest the colour ''Magenta'' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magenta

Quote....Magenta is a color evoked by light stronger in blue and red wavelengths than in yellowish-green wavelengths (complements of magenta have wavelength 500–530 nm, i.e. green).[2] In light experiments, magenta can be produced by removing the lime-green wavelengths from white light. It is an extra-spectral color, meaning it cannot be generated by a single wavelength of light, being a mixture of red and blue wavelengths Unquote.

C. Flower
18-11-2011, 10:34 AM
Discussion on this on Pat Kenny's programme at the moment - Dr. Cormac O'Rafferty from Astronomy Ireland is going to give a talk on this in Dublin tonight and is chatting with PK about it.

"E=MC2 ---mass is a form of energy

We see that verified all the time - particles with mass are created out of energy in experiments."

"Up to ten years ago, we didn't think neutrino's had mass at all, but now we think they have a tiny amount of mass, never yet detected (because different kinds of neutrinos can change into each other). Neutrinos were created out of protons in the Large Hadron Collider at Cern." "I nearly fell out of the car when the neutrinos arrived earlier than expected"

"The difference in time is 60 billionth of a second - there is an atomic clock at each end and the measurement relied on GPS."

It could be something to do with the way that the neutrinos were generated out of the protons he says.

There have been checks going on into this result for several years he says.

This guy is a lecturer in Waterford and is a wonderful communicator about science. I've heard him on the radio before.

For years relativity as a theory didn't have practical applications, until GPS came along and a correction had to be made for the different gravitational field and for the movement of the satellite relative to the earth.

Dr. Cormac O'Rafferty gives his talk tomorrow afternoon at 3 p.m. Also tomorrow night in Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies there is a talk on physics and in Waterford there is the Boyle Festival celebrating the publication of "The Sceptical Chemist"

I'm guessing that details could be checked on Astronomy Ireland's website.

Are there more than the four dimensions that we're used to? He thinks that there is probably an explanation for the "faster than the speed of light" result that leaves Einstein's theory intact.

Captain Con O'Sullivan
18-11-2011, 11:52 AM
'The collaboration behind the finding in September that neutrinos may travel faster than light has carried out an improved version of their experiment - and found the same result.

If confirmed by other experiments, the find could undermine one of the basic principles of modern physics.

Critics of the first report had said that the long bunches of neutrinos used could introduce an error into the test.

The new work, posted to the Arxiv repository, used much shorter bunches.

It has been submitted to the Journal of High Energy Physics, but has not yet been reviewed by the scientific community.'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236

Link to Arvix repository at Cornell

http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897v2

cdgalwegian
18-11-2011, 04:33 PM
“we don’t allow faster than light neutrinos in here” said the bartender.

A neutrino walks into a bar.

Trow
18-11-2011, 04:56 PM
“we don’t allow faster than light neutrinos in here” said the bartender.

A neutrino walks into a bar.
:D

Andrew49
18-11-2011, 05:07 PM
The team which found that neutrinos may travel faster than light has carried out an improved version of their experiment - and confirmed the result. If confirmed by other experiments, the find could undermine one of the basic principles of modern physics. Source (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236)


http://i.imgur.com/Egxn4.gif
See you all on Aldebaran, safe on the green desert sand.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAVxKFnlCMw

C. Flower
18-11-2011, 06:21 PM
“we don’t allow faster than light neutrinos in here” said the bartender.

A neutrino walks into a bar.

lolololol !

cdgalwegian
18-11-2011, 07:39 PM
DR. QUANTUM - EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED - YouTube

The dogs in the street know that Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity doesn't match up with the General Theory ( those pesky mathematical mutts). Einstein could have been wrong right from the start, because he didn't think entanglement was possible.
ps the experiments will show that it was a measurement error. He was right on that score.

cdgalwegian
24-02-2012, 09:02 AM
;)
DR. QUANTUM - EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIYU5IrIazc)

The dogs in the street know that Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity doesn't match up with the General Theory ( those pesky mathematical mutts). Einstein could have been wrong right from the start, because he didn't think entanglement was possible.
ps the experiments will show that it was a measurement error. He was right on that score.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/speed_of_light_upset_may_be_result_of_loose_wire_2 0120222/

Speed of Light Upset May Be Result of Loose Wire



Science Insider at Science:

According to sources familiar with the experiment, the 60 nanoseconds discrepancy appears to come from a bad connection between a fiber optic cable that connects to the GPS receiver used to correct the timing of the neutrinos’ flight and an electronic card in a computer. After tightening the connection and then measuring the time it takes data to travel the length of the fiber, researchers found that the data arrive 60 nanoseconds earlier than assumed. Since this time is subtracted from the overall time of flight, it appears to explain the early arrival of the neutrinos. New data, however, will be needed to confirm this hypothesis.



I'm from the future, so I know time travel is impossible.

Andrew49
17-03-2012, 10:05 AM
Neutrinos, not so fast after all!

New research suggests neutrinos that appeared to break one of Einstein's fundamental theories by travelling faster than the speed of light actually keep within the universal speed limit after all. The latest measurement of the sub-atomic particles' speed of flight from the CERN research centre in Geneva to Gran Sasso in central Italy contradicts an initial super-fast reading reported last September, which caused a scientific sensation. Source (http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0316/science.html)

Phew! We can all sleep safely in our beds now.

C. Flower
17-03-2012, 10:33 AM
my respect to you ))

You're welcome.

C. Flower
17-03-2012, 03:30 PM
Some related discussion here (supernovas, tachyons, etc.)
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/victor-stenger-on-speedy-neutrinos-did-we-cause-god/

Interesting.

Posted September 28, 2011 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

I also wonder how much energy goes into the reactions – is it sufficient to create particles with mass traveling faster than light?

Not if Einstein was right.

Once you get to relativistic speeds, accelerating something mostly adds to its mass, as the speed of light is an asymptote. Actually accelerating something to the speed of light would require an infinite amount of energy.

The reason that photons travel at the speed of light is that they don’t have any mass at all.

Neutrinos are understood to have mass because they have been observed transmuting into different particles, which is something that’s only possible for particles with mass.

Of course, if Einstein was worng, all bets are off….

And so he still isn't wrong, yet :)

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/einstein-can-rest-easy-as-neutrinos-obey-speed-limit-186966

fluffybiscuits
22-03-2012, 12:37 AM
Neutrinos, not so fast after all!

New research suggests neutrinos that appeared to break one of Einstein's fundamental theories by travelling faster than the speed of light actually keep within the universal speed limit after all. The latest measurement of the sub-atomic particles' speed of flight from the CERN research centre in Geneva to Gran Sasso in central Italy contradicts an initial super-fast reading reported last September, which caused a scientific sensation. Source (http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0316/science.html)

Phew! We can all sleep safely in our beds now.

Was at a talk last night called the Alchemist Cafe and the topic was Neutrinos (its a monthly event, a talk of sorts that explains cutting edge science in laymans terms). They discussed the neutrinos and that the neutrinos arrived three hours before the light did as light in the particle accelerator was constricted as it oscillated and went in at different angles. The measurement system they had was a bit faulty and as a result it was out by a six billionth of a second (all the clocks they use to measure the point at which the neutron is are tied into the atomic clocks). Am I making sense? It made sense in my head !

Another issue raised was why this research hit the media before most of the science journals, questions were raised about this being ethical (maybe not the neutrino research but other physics research).

random new yorker
22-03-2012, 03:24 AM
Another issue raised was why this research hit the media before most of the science journals, questions were raised about this being ethical (maybe not the neutrino research but other physics research).

It is called a Press Release here. Basically a layman's piece is published the day before the actual science gets out to build up buzz...nothing wrong about the process and 'tis used by all reputable Universities in the States.

And the press release is drafted at the University/Other Research Institution, after all the scientist does need to explain the science to the reporter :)

fluffybiscuits
26-03-2012, 08:46 PM
It is called a Press Release here. Basically a layman's piece is published the day before the actual science gets out to build up buzz...nothing wrong about the process and 'tis used by all reputable Universities in the States.

And the press release is drafted at the University/Other Research Institution, after all the scientist does need to explain the science to the reporter :)

Ah right, I apologise if I was wrong! It was the view of a physicist (who kept on mentioning that very fact) that he was of the opinion that it was in some way unethtical.It does have to come out in laymans terms for people like myself otherwise we just get tied up in knots :)

Hapax
26-03-2012, 08:51 PM
It does have to come out in laymans terms for people like myself otherwise we just get tied up in knots :)

Best stay clear of string theory, then. :D

fluffybiscuits
26-03-2012, 09:42 PM
Best stay clear of string theory, then. :D

Oh how did I not see that coming ;)

Andrew49
30-03-2012, 08:37 PM
The Italian professor who led an experiment that initially appeared to challenge one of the fundaments of modern physics by showing particles moving faster than the speed of light has resigned after the finding was overturned earlier this month. Italy's national institute of nuclear physics INFN said on Friday that Antonio Ereditato had stepped down as coordinator of the so-called OPERA experiment but had no comment beyond saying it "took note" of his decision. was not immediately possible to reach Ereditato for a comment. Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46906760/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.T3YK6NkpfTo)

Count Bobulescu
02-04-2013, 08:27 PM
Nothing to do with the Hadron etc, but a nice little story about Einstein on the anniversary of his first arrival in the US.


Albert Einstein was already famous when he arrived on April 2, 1921, for his first trip to the United States. In May, he would deliver four well-received lectures on relativity at Princeton University, his future academic home.
While in the U.S., a minor cloud appeared on the great physicist’s horizon, however. A Princeton-educated mathematician and physicist named Dayton C. Miller, then teaching at Case School of Applied Science in Ohio, had performed experiments in the esoteric field of ether drift. The results, Miller claimed, contradicted Einstein’s findings on gravity. If they were accurate, as Einstein conceded, they would have undermined the theory of relativity.
Miller’s experiments, which could never be duplicated, were eventually discredited. But Einstein’s response was instructive. Rather than criticizing the man, Einstein went to Cleveland to meet him.
Einstein also discussed Miller’s work with a mathematics professor named Oswald Veblen, who’d been brought to Princeton by the school’s former president, Woodrow Wilson. Veblen was American through-and-through. Born to Norwegian parents in Decorah, Iowa, he had served as a captain in the U.S. Army during World War I, and is credited with advances in ballistics technology.
Nonetheless, like many academics of his generation, Veblen spoke fluent German, then the international language of science. And it was in his native language that Albert Einstein confided his view of any experiment purporting to cast doubt on relativity:
“Raffiniert is der Herr Gott,” Einstein said, “aber boshaft is Er nicht.” (“The Lord God is subtle, but malicious He is not.”)
In a 1930 letter to Veblen, Einstein amplified on this thought. “Nature conceals her secrets because she is sublime, not because she is a trickster,” he wrote.
Much later, after his work in particle physics helped end World War II – and reduced Nagasaki and Hiroshima to rubble -- Einstein was asked why it was that human beings could discover the secrets of the atom, but not control them.
“That is simple,” he replied. “Because politics is more difficult than physics.

Count Bobulescu
26-04-2013, 05:54 PM
Damn!

Einstein Proved Right on Gravity—Again (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324743704578444913060125542.html?m od=djemTEW_h) Einstein's Gravity Theory Passes Toughest Test Yet (http://www.space.com/20826-einstein-gravity-theory-toughest-test.html)

























An extreme pair of superdense stars orbiting each other has put Einstein's general theory of relativity to its toughest test yet, and the crazy-haired physicist still comes out on top.