Thread: It is always darkest before dawn - for neutrinos?

Gugi,
I can wholeheartedly agree! Most of my instructors were frustrated that they could not keep the same edition, and some would teach from older editions when they could. It does seem a college education is almost a must. I love my job and it is easy and I have a great boss and co-workers and corporate environment, not many can say that - but would not have this job without that piece of paper.

However, just like the line in "Good Will Hunting," (paraphrased) Yeah, the expensive education you have could be had for a couple of dollars worth of late fees from your local library. One could, with proper motivation, learn just about all there is on any subject from books, libraries, Internet, or even the itunes University. However, one must have that expensive, pretty, parchment to say that they learned something from some institution to get a job.

I know this is a rant and off topic - my apologies. I will say that I have had some very good experiences in Higher Education especially Community College. I also had a lot of wonderful instructors who would have been happy to help each student more. In fact, many begged for students to come see them during their office hours. Not a dig on MOST instructors, just the system.
All of this from Neutrinos that are faster than a speeding bullet, er.... the Speed Of Light!

Well, it's hard to argue against what the free market values (there will always be plenty of exceptions, but most people are simply not exceptional so those do not apply to them) I don't think anybody since Freeman Dyson has gotten a tenure track position at an ivy league without a professional degree.

Originally Posted by coachschaller

All of this from Neutrinos that are faster than a speeding bullet, er.... the Speed Of Light!

Pft, light, I can beat it on a bicycle Light speed reduction to 17 metres per second in an ultracold atomic gas : Article : Nature

*I make no claim to the validity of his views, just an interesting quote
**plus he's a handsome man.

Originally Posted by coachschaller

However, just like the line in "Good Will Hunting," (paraphrased) Yeah, the expensive education you have could be had for a couple of dollars worth of late fees from your local library. One could, with proper motivation, learn just about all there is on any subject from books, libraries, Internet, or even the itunes University. However, one must have that expensive, pretty, parchment to say that they learned something from some institution to get a job.

That is just the way it is, and the way it is likely to remain.
That is not to say that hard work and perseverance cannot overcome, just that you'd better be prepared for the hard slog if you don't go get that piece of paper!
I'm working in the medical / pharmaceutical industry without having been to a University - it is possible, but you have to start by washing the glassware and be prepared to prove yourself to progress.
Experience wins out after a certain level, people want to employ someone who knows what they are doing in a real world scenario!

Anyway, rant over lol!
Back to (the future) neutrinos

Originally Posted by Bruno

It would also explain a couple of other things, like why neutrinos are detected some minutes before the EM signature of a supernova.

I guess, but that doesn't jive with the results of the experiment. If one extrapolates just how much faster the neutrinos in Italy were traveling than light in a vacuum, one finds that neutrinos should arrive a few years ahead of the EM for a supernova in our own galaxy. So neutrinos arriving just minutes earlier would indicate (if due to superluminal speed) a margin of speed difference much less than the tolerance of the recent experiment in question

Unless of course they like to move at different speeds

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I guess, but that doesn't jive with the results of the experiment. If one extrapolates just how much faster the neutrinos in Italy were traveling than light in a vacuum, one finds that neutrinos should arrive a few years ahead of the EM for a supernova in our own galaxy. So neutrinos arriving just minutes earlier would indicate (if due to superluminal speed) a margin of speed difference much less than the tolerance of the recent experiment in question

Unless of course they like to move at different speeds

Am I being foolish by suggesting that, over the distance travelled in this experiment, the error in the instrumentation must be within the standard deviation of the results?

Originally Posted by PaddyX21

Am I being foolish by suggesting that, over the distance travelled in this experiment, the error in the instrumentation must be within the standard deviation of the results?

I don't know - tell me first what is the standard deviation of the results and we can take it from there!

Originally Posted by PaddyX21

Am I being foolish by suggesting that, over the distance travelled in this experiment, the error in the instrumentation must be within the standard deviation of the results?

Yes.

The error margin of the entire system was 10 ns. The observed discrepancy was 60 ns, which is way beyond the error margin.
There are over 100 names on the paper, and teams of scientists spent months covering all possible sources of interference, ranging from positioning error to the tidal influence of the moon. They came up blank.

Btw, similar observations have been made before, but in those cases they were at the edge of the error margin. One place where they made such an observation is going to repeat the CERN experiment and hopes to be done within a couple of months. Technically, they already have the data of the current experiments. Now they need another couple of months to interpret data.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I don't know - tell me first what is the standard deviation of the results and we can take it from there!

I'm afraid it is a little beyond my ability to understand, but here are the results in question: http://static.arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4897.pdf

Yes.

The error margin of the entire system was 10 ns. The observed discrepancy was 60 ns, which is way beyond the error margin.
There are over 100 names on the paper, and teams of scientists spent months covering all possible sources of interference, ranging from positioning error to the tidal influence of the moon. They came up blank.

Btw, similar observations have been made before, but in those cases they were at the edge of the error margin. One place where they made such an observation is going to repeat the CERN experiment and hopes to be done within a couple of months. Technically, they already have the data of the current experiments. Now they need another couple of months to interpret data.

Yeah, I got the 7.4 ns systematic uncertainty, plus the 18ish ns statistical uncertainty, but only after I had asked the question lol!
And with an n=16111 then it looks pretty compelling.

*waves hand semi-convincingly*
These are not the neutrinos you are looking for.