Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
1–10 of 255 posts
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#2It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#3A news article where both the scientists and the reporter understate the claims, publish the data, and ask other teams to please prove them wrong.
I like this. Most of the time the reporters overstate the research, the scientists keep the data secret, and the general public is left scratching their heads.
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#4I desperately want to believe that this will somehow enable us to live in a Star-Trek future, even though I'm sure it won't.
Would someone with some knowledge of physics care to break down the ramifications of this (if it's not some sort of measurement error)?
Please?
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#5If I calculated correctly, that's only about .0025% faster than c. Practical implications?
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#6It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light?
And as for the "c" in e=mc^2, doesn't this suddenly make "c" an unknown constant? Doesn't the fact that "c" changes suddenly change the values of the other variables in that equation as well? That seems pretty fundamental to me...
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#7It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light? And as for the "c" in e=mc^2, doesn't this suddenly make "c" an unknown constant? Doesn't the fact that "c" changes suddenly change the values of the other variables in that equation as well? That seems pretty fundamental to me...
As I understand it, Einstein's work rests on there being a fundamental maximum 'speed' and it seemed to him as though the speed of photons was that limit, so 'speed of light' became synonymous with this maximum. But it doesn't necessarily have to be so.
So if there's something faster, it changes our understanding of photons but not the existence of this fundamental maximum speed.
As you note, our efforts to measure c may have been off due to measuring the wrong thing, but I don't know the ramifications of a small % change in c.
(I'm not a physicist)
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#8It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light? And as for the "c" in e=mc^2, doesn't this suddenly make "c" an unknown constant? Doesn't the fact that "c" changes suddenly change the values of the other variables in that equation as well? That seems pretty fundamental to me...
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light?
Photons speed up and slow down routinely, depending on what medium they're traveling through. c, as it is used in the equations of relativity, is currently believed to be equal to the speed of light in a vacuum. But, with my limited knowledge of GR, my understanding is that gaika is correct and that the rest of the theory can still stand if this equality is broken.
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#9It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light? And as for the "c" in e=mc^2, doesn't this suddenly make "c" an unknown constant? Doesn't the fact that "c" changes suddenly change the values of the other variables in that equation as well? That seems pretty fundamental to me...
I think what he's getting at is that there's this value "c" that's really important to physics appearing in equations like e=mc^2 and determining the absolute upper bound on speed, and by the way, we used to assume that photons traveled at c, rather than their actual rate of 99.9975% of c.
I don't know whether changing c by this amount would break many experimental results. Adding a rest mass to photos sounds potentially revolutionary.
Re: Speed-of-light experiments yield baffling result at LHC
#10It wouldn't break current theory, it would just mean that photons travel slower than "speed of light" and have non-zero rest mass. Constant c in relativity instead of speed of photons would just mean fastest speed possible.
Isn't the speed at which photons travel, by definition, the speed of light? And as for the "c" in e=mc^2, doesn't this suddenly make "c" an unknown constant? Doesn't the fact that "c" changes suddenly change the values of the other variables in that equation as well? That seems pretty fundamental to me...
Einstein based his theory on the maximum speed at which information can propogate. That's always been assumed to be the speed of light (photons). It may be possible that there is something else that can propogate information faster (e.g. neutrinos). There would still be an upper speed limit, but it wouldn't be the one we thought it was :)