Scientists Claim Faster Than Light Particle Observed

[Conley]

GENEVA (AP) -- One of the very pillars of physics and Einstein's theory of relativity - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - was rocked Thursday by new findings from one of the world's foremost laboratories.

European researchers said they clocked an oddball type of subatomic particle called a neutrino going faster than the 186,282 miles per second that has long been considered the cosmic speed limit.

The claim was met with skepticism, with one outside physicist calling it the equivalent of saying you have a flying carpet. In fact, the researchers themselves are not ready to proclaim a discovery and are asking other physicists to independently try to verify their findings.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

This is getting a lot of press but it simply can't be true without making us have to rethink a lot of Einstein's work (as people much smarter than I have stated). We'll see if other scientists can reproduce the results but these are legit scientists who have made the claim.

[spunkloaf]

One of the biggest quests with the LHC is to find the Higgs Boson. Some people call this the "God Particle," but it is largely a misnomer. This is the particle which is said to give mass to other particles, and it is also theorized to exist everywhere in what is called a Higgs Field. It gives space and time its shape.

Relativity says nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. But what about mass-less particles? What about particles which don't interact with the Higgs Field?

[Conley]

I've heard of the Higgs Boson but don't know much about it.

How can a particle not have a mass? I mean neutrinos are very close, right? But something with no mass at all?

[spunkloaf]

It is a mind-bending concept. If something has no mass, how do we observe it....even if it exists theoretically? The answer is that the ghostly particles interact with other heavy particles which we can observe, and make them behave in a predictive abnormal manner which gives evidence to their existence. But the thought of mass-less particles is still puzzling.

[Captain Obvious]

Better question - how can we harness that energy to increase the chances of mutually assured destruction?

[spunkloaf]

Better question - how can we harness that energy to increase the chances of mutually assured destruction?

We're going to get to a point where we discover something way more powerful than we've ever known, whether we're ready for it or not. No amount of protesting or conspiracy to conceal it will keep it from happening. So we might as well just hope for the best and prepare for the worst as we are hurled towards our fate. And hope the good guys find it first.

Isn't it creepy to think another country already has some kind of weapon which is as alien and destructive to us as the atom bomb was to Japan?

[Conley]

Better question - how can we harness that energy to increase the chances of mutually assured destruction?

We're going to get to a point where we discover something way more powerful than we've ever known, whether we're ready for it or not. No amount of protesting or conspiracy to conceal it will keep it from happening. So we might as well just hope for the best and prepare for the worst as we are hurled towards our fate. And hope the good guys find it first.

Isn't it creepy to think another country already has some kind of weapon which is as alien and destructive to us as the atom bomb was to Japan?

That is creepy to think but I don't believe it. If you're talking about something coming out of CERN we're not going to Pearl Harbor their azz so we should be ok.

[spunkloaf]

Better question - how can we harness that energy to increase the chances of mutually assured destruction?

We're going to get to a point where we discover something way more powerful than we've ever known, whether we're ready for it or not. No amount of protesting or conspiracy to conceal it will keep it from happening. So we might as well just hope for the best and prepare for the worst as we are hurled towards our fate. And hope the good guys find it first.

Isn't it creepy to think another country already has some kind of weapon which is as alien and destructive to us as the atom bomb was to Japan?

That is creepy to think but I don't believe it. If you're talking about something coming out of CERN we're not going to Pearl Harbor their azz so we should be ok.

I don't think CERN is a threat, I'm talking about the idea that any foreign country could have advanced technology which we are unaware of, and that's kinda scary. Just a bit.

[Conley]

Better question - how can we harness that energy to increase the chances of mutually assured destruction?

We're going to get to a point where we discover something way more powerful than we've ever known, whether we're ready for it or not. No amount of protesting or conspiracy to conceal it will keep it from happening. So we might as well just hope for the best and prepare for the worst as we are hurled towards our fate. And hope the good guys find it first.

Isn't it creepy to think another country already has some kind of weapon which is as alien and destructive to us as the atom bomb was to Japan?

That is creepy to think but I don't believe it. If you're talking about something coming out of CERN we're not going to Pearl Harbor their azz so we should be ok.

I don't think CERN is a threat, I'm talking about the idea that any foreign country could have advanced technology which we are unaware of, and that's kinda scary. Just a bit.

Yeah...I just don't see one of our enemies developing such a technology. Maybe China but they wouldn't use it on us, not while our economies are so co-dependent. But if CERN developed the technology theoretically it could leak into unfriendly hands.