[tomtom]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

[Stubbs]

That'll be a neutrino drive in my spaceship to break the speed of light then! 

[lagerstarfish]

Just what I need for my time machine

[csurfleet]

That'll be a neutrino drive in my spaceship to break the speed of light then! 

Fat chance of that, I still haven't got my goddamn jetpack yet! 

[SA Chris]

Looks like Bonnie Tyler was right (well almost)



(Maybe that's a photo of a neutrino passing through her head?)

[chris05]

Some good quotes here:

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

"Cause cannot come after effect and that is absolutely fundamental to our construction of the physical universe. If we do not have causality, we are buggered."

[Eddies]

Does that mean I can go (went) back in time and start climbing as soon as I could walk... No, I havent (
Time travel is impossible

[Stubbs]

The major problem is quite simply one of grammar, and the main work to consult in this matter is Dr Dan Streetmentioner's Time Traveller's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations. It will tell you for instance how to describe something that was about to happen to you in the past before you avoided it by time-jumping forward two days in order to avoid it. The event will be described differently according to whether you are talking about it from the standpoint of your own natural time, from a time in the further future, or a time in the further past and is further complicated by the possibility of conducting conversations whilst you are actually travelling from one time to another with the intention of becoming your own father or mother.

Most readers get as far as the Future Semi-Conditionally Modified Subinverted Plagal Past Subjunctive Intentional before giving up: and in fact in later editions of the book all the pages beyond this point have been left blank to save on printing costs.

[lagerstarfish]

That'll be a neutrino drive in my spaceship to break the speed of light then! 

Fat chance of that, I still haven't got my goddamn jetpack yet! 

I'm OK about not getting the jetpack; my hoverboard more than makes up for that.

I'd still like the Sheffield Supertram system to be replaced with a chainglass anti-grav monorail

[Eddies]

"The Encyclopedia Galactica has much to say on the theory and practice of time travel, most of which is incomprehensible to anyone who hasn't spent at least four lifetimes studying advanced hypermathematics, and since it was impossible to do this before time travel was invented, there is a certain amount of confusion as to how the idea was arrived at in the first place. One rationalization of this problem states that time travel was, by its very nature, discovered simultaneously at all periods of history, but this is clearly bunk."

"The trouble is that a lot of history is now quite clearly bunk as well."

[Oldmanmatt]

MOND MOND MOND MOND????

Paradigm shift?

Whee Hee!

[slackline]

Watch the presentation live now

[slackline]

Well, first thing is their old GPS clocks weren't well synced, but they upgraded them in 2008, lets see how that improved things.

[slackline]

Panic over, they took the square root when they should have squared!

[fried]

Any chance of a bit more info Slackers? The presentation isn't available for a replay and it's been worrying me so much today I haven't been able to do any work.

[Oldmanmatt]

Yeah! More info!
Can't get the link either.

If they had taken a root istead of the square, it would have been orders of magnitute out; not fractions of seconds...

[Bubba]

I think that was a Slackers geeky joke

[fried]

I think that was a Slackers geeky joke

Yeah, joke's on me! I spent all of 10 minutes looking for the info. 

[Falling Down]

 

[tomtom]

Its a shame it wasnt a US research team, then we could use the old 'English' units to Metric rouse/explanation

I find this whole thing fascinating - as its great to see how science works - by that I mean how you have a dominant theory around for ages, then someone comes along and suggests it may not all be right.. Then theres a mixture of people agreeing, saying its bollocks, partially agreeing and disagreeing etc.. And those who say we can explain this with existing theories. Its great to watch..

Anyway, AFAIK this finding could be fundamental as it throws up some whopper question marks about  Einsteins theory of relativity that has underpinned a huge chunk of physics for a number of years.. Never mind double dip recessions this could effect everything

[burbistan]

The team's paper (http://static.arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4897.pdf) is readable by non-physicists for the most part.

Note team has not compared time of flight for neutrinos and photons over the same path, which will have to be the next step. They have measured neutrino time of flight over an accurately known distance.

My bet is it's an error, but I'd be chuffed to see new physics come out of it.

[Stubbs]

The publicity this has got (on radio 4 at least) has been a great excuse for talking heads to explain the scientific method to people who otherwise may not understand the difference between beliefs and theories.

[Oldmanmatt]

 

The publicity this has got (on radio 4 at least) has been a great excuse for talking heads to explain the scientific method to people who otherwise may not understand the difference between beliefs and theories.

[fried]

Yes, but if I here someone else talking about 'proving' theories I'm going to get punchy!

[tomtom]

The publicity this has got (on radio 4 at least) has been a great excuse for talking heads to explain the scientific method to people who otherwise may not understand the difference between beliefs and theories.

Indeed, if I hear another creationist say 'evolution is only a theory' without anyone pointing out that creationism is only based on a story, I'll.. I'll.. I'll go out and burn my ark. Bah.