http://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland latinoamerica Iceland    Contact            Users: 174 Active, 24 Logged in - Time: 11:42
Poker News










LP Pokerstars Avatars:



Neutrino speed

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
Forum Index > General
 1 
  2 
  3 
  > 
  Last 
  All 
palak   United States. Jun 11 2012 08:35. Posts 4601

Old but meh.
As some may remember last year a team of scientists recorded neutrinos going faster than light. Leading to a ton of poorly written science articles and this picture making the rounds.

Anyhow new tests were run which were unable to reproduce the results. Analysis of the initial test area found error sources + Show Spoiler +


http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/neutrinos-faulty-cable/

A few days ago those errors were confirmed.

  Physicists at the CERN laboratory have put the final nail in the coffin for the idea that neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light. They also confirmed that the groundbreaking results from 2011 can be blamed on faulty equipment.


http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/neutrinos-cant-beat-light/

cliffs: neutrinos don't go faster than light, Einstein wins.

dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquariumLast edit: 11/06/2012 08:35

okyougosu   Russian Federation. Jun 11 2012 08:40. Posts 907

[x] did read that before
[ ] profit

Lammerman 

dnagardi   Hungary. Jun 11 2012 08:51. Posts 1190

tesla is a fckin badass

whats the point of this thread again?


D_smart_S   Bulgaria. Jun 11 2012 08:55. Posts 688

So some scientists concluded that there are particles with speed higher than that of light, then they said they were wrong and that is enough for you to conclude that they are now correct? Don't you think that they might be wrong a second time? Not that I know what's the truth here but quantum particles are proven to communicate instantaneously, surpassing the speed of light - Quantum Entaglement. It's not said that they communicate via a sent and received wave of energy such as light but quantum physicists believe they are "teleporting" information (lol there should be a better way to explain it i'm sure). So I guess if that is possible, it might be possible that there are particles we cannot detect that are faster than light. I dunno, just food for thought.

Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speechLast edit: 11/06/2012 08:55

kingpowa   France. Jun 11 2012 08:58. Posts 1525

What is also important, is that this scientific community faced a problem for which they had no explanation and they decided to reveal all the data they had to the public in order to let people to try to explain it.
So they had no problem saying : "we don't understand", which doesn't happen very often in other fields.

sorry for shitty english. 

kingpowa   France. Jun 11 2012 09:03. Posts 1525


  On June 11 2012 08:55 D_smart_S wrote:
So some scientists concluded that there are particles with speed higher than that of light, then they said they were wrong and that is enough for you to conclude that they are now correct? Don't you think that they might be wrong a second time? Not that I know what's the truth here but quantum particles are proven to communicate instantaneously, surpassing the speed of light - Quantum Entaglement. It's not said that they communicate via a sent and received wave of energy such as light but quantum physicists believe they are "teleporting" information (lol there should be a better way to explain it i'm sure). So I guess if that is possible, it might be possible that there are particles we cannot detect that are faster than light. I dunno, just food for thought.


There is something quite different between you and those scientists. They don't conclude as fast as you can, they don't assert things just saying "that are proven".
So, no, they never said they demonstrated (or concluded) that there were particles with a speed higher than the one of light. They just said : "here is the experiment we made. Results are odd, and we can't explain it, let's check again, and if you want, do it with us". Next, they tried to repeat the experience and did not find the same results, and in the meantime found an explanation for the first odd results.

sorry for shitty english. 

palak   United States. Jun 11 2012 09:29. Posts 4601


  On June 11 2012 08:58 kingpowa wrote:
What is also important, is that this scientific community faced a problem for which they had no explanation and they decided to reveal all the data they had to the public in order to let people to try to explain it.
So they had no problem saying : "we don't understand", which doesn't happen very often in other fields.



what also makes this such a travesty is that the lead researcher of the faulty experiment resigned. He did everything 100% right by the scientific method and ideology he shouldn't be punished when errors were found in his experiment.

@dsmart...entanglement doesn't actually transmit information faster than light, it's a common misconception. Entanglement can roughly be explained as the following. You take a red rock and a blue rock. Put both rocks in a bag, close ur eyes and mix the bag. Then with ur eyes still closed take a rock out and throw it across the solar system. When u check the rock in the bag u instantly know the color of the rock that is at the other side of the solar system. That's, roughly, entanglement. No information was transferred faster than light.
More/better info http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/

dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquariumLast edit: 11/06/2012 09:30

Mariuslol   Norway. Jun 11 2012 09:34. Posts 4411

I felt cool when this first happened many months ago, a mate told me, they just found some thingys that go faster than light. And I told him, no, it's wrong calculations, they don't go faster. Really felt it in my gut, they don't.

Remeber I saw a talk about a recent supernova, and they had calculated when the light came and the neutrino's. There's no way they would come when they did unless they were travelling at the same speed, the difference would be mindboggling.

yay, think it was on Sixty Symbol channel, they also interview the Professors there when the news came about the speed thingy, and they're really skeptic, saying it's prolly not the case, and after it's debunked, ye, kinda like we suspected.

Yeap


D_smart_S   Bulgaria. Jun 11 2012 10:48. Posts 688


  On June 11 2012 09:29 palak wrote:
Show nested quote +



what also makes this such a travesty is that the lead researcher of the faulty experiment resigned. He did everything 100% right by the scientific method and ideology he shouldn't be punished when errors were found in his experiment.

@dsmart...entanglement doesn't actually transmit information faster than light, it's a common misconception. Entanglement can roughly be explained as the following. You take a red rock and a blue rock. Put both rocks in a bag, close ur eyes and mix the bag. Then with ur eyes still closed take a rock out and throw it across the solar system. When u check the rock in the bag u instantly know the color of the rock that is at the other side of the solar system. That's, roughly, entanglement. No information was transferred faster than light.
More/better info http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/

man, I don't want to argue but Quantum Entanglement has nothing to do with what you just said, absolutely nothing. If I take a hair from ur hair and put it a 1000 miles away and I put you under some stress and measure your reaction ( I can't remember which factors are measured, I think it's the electrical discharge or stg like that) the cells in the hair that is 1000 miles away from you will give out the exact same signal you did at the exact same time to the tiniest fraction of time we can measure - in other words instantly. The reading of the two signals are graphs that match 100% ( like a sharkscope graph). That's the way quantum particles communicate, that's a very basic fact but I will not bother arguing about it. It's an instant transfer of information but not by means of a wave of energy. That's the fascinating side of Quantum Physics.

Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speechLast edit: 11/06/2012 10:52

taco   Iceland. Jun 11 2012 11:42. Posts 1761


  On June 11 2012 10:48 D_smart_S wrote:
man, I don't want to argue but Quantum Entanglement has nothing to do with what you just said, absolutely nothing. If I take a hair from ur hair and put it a 1000 miles away and I put you under some stress and measure your reaction ( I can't remember which factors are measured, I think it's the electrical discharge or stg like that) the cells in the hair that is 1000 miles away from you will give out the exact same signal you did at the exact same time to the tiniest fraction of time we can measure - in other words instantly. The reading of the two signals are graphs that match 100% ( like a sharkscope graph). That's the way quantum particles communicate, that's a very basic fact but I will not bother arguing about it. It's an instant transfer of information but not by means of a wave of energy. That's the fascinating side of Quantum Physics.



No you idiot, you can't put the hair you have under stress and make the hair far away change, you can merely observe the hair you have and know the state of the other one.

In other words: You can not use it to transfer data. Information can not be transferred faster than c.

Just because you read ridiculously sensationalized articles like this one: http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html
doesn't mean information can actually be transferred faster than c, although you can measure something and get a response instantaneously (have them tangled)
doesn't mean you can devise a way to transfer information that way.


palak   United States. Jun 11 2012 11:43. Posts 4601

^transfer of information between any 2 particles is forbidden by relativity, which yes does still apply to quantum mechanics.
Edit: meant to apply to dsmart, not taco

dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquariumLast edit: 11/06/2012 13:13

uiCk   Canada. Jun 11 2012 13:06. Posts 2989

google "instant transfer of information" , pretty sure it's contrary of being a "fact". But i guess Illuminati owns that site too.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=472775

I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson 

Zep   United States. Jun 11 2012 13:35. Posts 2292


  On June 11 2012 08:55 D_smart_S wrote:
So some scientists concluded that there are particles with speed higher than that of light, then they said they were wrong and that is enough for you to conclude that they are now correct?


Yeah, fuck the scientific method. Once is good enough for me. I love the fact that you attempt to explain how a key scientific concept has nothing to do with this, yet you don't even understand why it was necessary for the experiment to be repeated.

NeillyJQ: I really wanted to prove to myself I could beat NL200, I did over a small sample, and believe Ill be crushing there in the future. 

TalentedTom    Canada. Jun 11 2012 14:43. Posts 19853

screw you tesla, talking all that smack, albert wins again

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us and as we let our own lights shine we unconsciously give other people permision to do the same 

Highcard   Canada. Jun 11 2012 15:44. Posts 5120

There is a reason for Telsa making a car, he is so behind in coolness to Einstein that they try to make up for it with an e-car.

I have learned from poker that being at the table is not a grind, the grind is living and poker is how I pass the time 

Graisseux   Canada. Jun 11 2012 17:11. Posts 464


  On June 11 2012 10:48 D_smart_S wrote:
Show nested quote +


man, I don't want to argue but Quantum Entanglement has nothing to do with what you just said, absolutely nothing. If I take a hair from ur hair and put it a 1000 miles away and I put you under some stress and measure your reaction ( I can't remember which factors are measured, I think it's the electrical discharge or stg like that) the cells in the hair that is 1000 miles away from you will give out the exact same signal you did at the exact same time to the tiniest fraction of time we can measure - in other words instantly. The reading of the two signals are graphs that match 100% ( like a sharkscope graph). That's the way quantum particles communicate, that's a very basic fact but I will not bother arguing about it. It's an instant transfer of information but not by means of a wave of energy. That's the fascinating side of Quantum Physics.



You talk about a difficult subject that you don't even slightly understand. And btw a hair is not a quantum particle lol, no quantum effect on such a huge object...

 Last edit: 11/06/2012 17:12

D_smart_S   Bulgaria. Jun 11 2012 18:25. Posts 688

a hair consists of cells which consist of atoms and subatoms and quantum particles. It's the electrical charge of a cell that's measured I think but whatever the details, the thing is that quantum particles communicate instantly.

Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech 

asdf2000   United States. Jun 11 2012 18:56. Posts 7352

my balls can go faster than the speed of light

Grindin so hard, Im smashin pussies left and right. 

Zorglub   Denmark. Jun 11 2012 19:56. Posts 2870

Thoughts are faster than light, they can go from the sun to planet earth in less than 8 minutes, and they can even reach the furthest galaxies and beyond.

I started out with nothing and I still got most of it left 

SleepyHead   . Jun 11 2012 20:00. Posts 688

lol

How do you have a full house wtf - traxamillion 

 
 1 
  2 
  3 
  > 
  Last 
  All 




Copyright © 2014. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap DonkeyTest