http://xkcd.com/955/

I've been reading about the experiment and it seems a bit suspect. I don't think the guys are CERN are being dishonest, but I think there's lots of room for error.

Either way, I don't think this will affect people's perception of science. The world is already filled with wonderful devices based on the fundamental principles of the universe (GPS, Microwave oven, computers, etc..) and most people don't seem to care.

Yes, yes, yes. Of course. Hence the caveat that we assume it's legit.

Sorry, that was @Draug.

@Abg,
I've been pretty flabbergasted at how much the paper has infiltrated the public sphere. I've had many non-science people bring it up in conversation with me already so I think it is one of those things that may have a real effect.
Maybe not quite Einstein in 1905 but certainly seems to have made a bit of a splash in the media.

Yeah and in a week people will forget about it. Just wait and see.

Unfortunately, you may be correct.

This was actually a nice article about it:
http://news.discovery.com/space/reality-check-what-are-those-naughty-neutrinos-really-up-to-110924.html

They aren't mocing faster than light... They are folding space-time and instantly moving from one point to another. The spice must *flow*!

Damn Space Guild. They ruin everything!

Yeah, but the sapho juice has sure made my progrmaming go fatser and made me a better Dip player.

According to an article I read about it, it is most likely an error in the calculations regarding the detectors or some such thing, and is not, in fact, a violation of relativity.

While the Star Trek geek in me would love to see a chink in relativity's armor, I doubt it is true.

Of course, photon teleportation has already demonstrated, effectively, FTL-communication using quantum entanglement...

It's great that CERN is producing interesting results and data. The fact is that, as Einsteinian physics built on Newtonian physics without completly invalidating it (and underpins most of our modern gizmos and whatnots), so whatever comes out of CERN (and other similar facilities) will, in the long term, fundamentally change the way we live

Physics is not about throwing Einstein out of the window but about explaining real world phenomena. In the last century, special relativity has explained gigantic number of events with extreme precision (although not exact precision if the result legit) so any new theory has to explain why it was so successful even though it was fundamentally wrong. On the other hand, one can sacrifice local Lorentz invariance and still somewhat safe the knowledge we already have. In noncommutative field theories, the ultimate speed limit is the same as the speed of gravitons. Neutrinos would be slightly slower but still faster than photons that would travel at 0.99999 of the speed of gravitons. That's one of those possibilities for explaining the result. Physics would be seriously overhauled but some of the brightest humans work in this area so there's nothing to be afraid of, especially since the old theory was still remarkably useful.

It's amazing how many of our modern gizmos work without us really understanding why (and by us I mean the scientists and people who make them, not just the people who use them who almost never know how they work). In the last few weeks scientists have finally discovered how the world's most popular insect repellent works after over half a century of successful use.

Looking at a map of Europe, and taking into account the curve of the surface of the earth, the neutrinos look like they would have had to travel via the Florence sewerage system. If that can't motivate something to exceed the speed of light, nothing will!

ulytau - I agree that physics is about explaining real world phenomenon...which is why I like seeing relativity possibly take a hit. Too many people are too quick to say "X is wrong because it violates Y" (where Y is some preexisting belief) which is hilarious because history is full of scientific beliefs being tossed out the window based upon new understandings of the universe.

The irony, of course, is that Einstein himself called quantum entanglement (and thus out FTL communication...) "spooky action at a distance". i.e. he had no freaking clue how/why it worked/happens/etc.

So I like seeing relativity take a hit, because if it legitimately does, it will inspire scientists to explore new ideas, instead of only trying to validate existing belief.

@Octavious I'm not sure how many "modern gizmos" work without our understanding. I dislike this statement and don't believe it to be true without more than one example of insect repellent.

@krellin

Entangled particles don't seem to transmit information (as far as we can tell), so it doesn't violate relativity in the same way neutrinos would if these results are true.

I disagree that entangled particles don't transmit information. If you entangle two photons and then separate them, you know have two photons with, for example, the same spin. If you affect the primary/first/whatever to change it's spin, the other will instantaneously/simultaneously change. You have thus transmitted information. It's ain't a mp3 file....but it *is* information that is FTL.

yeah, but krellin, while you will know what the other photon's spin is, you will have no way of telling anyone without light speed (at best) communication methods.

So you can know the answer of something which someone else may ask, but you can't set that answer (so that someone else can read it)

Thus quantum information appears to travel faster than light, but classical causality is not violated.

I agree with orath

More importantly, it's information that can't be measured, because every time you measure it, you'll change the result, so you won't know if what you're seeing is what the other person sent or not.

I admit it is a weird case of non-locality, but it doesn't appear to violate causality. Which just comes under the heading 'weirdness of quantum mechanics'

@orthaic/abge....you both are 100% wrong. There is already experimental, repeatable evidence that photons can be entangled and separated, and then have one **instantly** (i.e. ZERO communication time) acted upon by changing the other.

Maybe you two don't understand Quantum Physics....this is my guess, becuase it is *basic* quantum theory....

Photon A and Photon B are "entangled" and then physically separated.

Measure the spin on Photon A and Photon B and find that they are both *exactly* the same.

Through quantum methods, you observe, affect, etc Photon A....and then instananeously you observe that Photon B....which has NOT BEEN ACTED UPON AT ALL suddenly demonstrates the same spin at Photon A. i.e. INSTANTANEOUSLY you have transmitted information (in this case, photon spin) over distance instantly. i.e. FTL communication.

Yes...as stated before, this is not an mp3 file. But...if "0" is no change in spin, and "1" is "change in spin"....then you either communicated a "0" or a "1". You transmitted data instantly over a distance....FTL communication.

I truly don't understand what is so difficult to comprehend about this concept.


Wait...wait...Abge...other guy....neither of you is an engineering major...and thus you are commenting on things you have no comprehension of. And yet...I explained it as clearly as a laymen needs to grasp the concept. So...what exactly do you not understand about this idea? And...it is NOT JUST AND IDEA BUT A ****PROVEN**** EXPIREMENT!!!

I'm not even talking about theory....I'm talking about **true** verified, published data. Photonic teleportation is a **reality**....and thus instantaneously data transference is a **reality**....which means we can communicate at FTL speeds.

It isn't even a disputable topic. It is published, accepted science!!!!

abge...."it's information that can't be measured, because every time you measure it, you'll change the result"...you *clearly* know nothing about Quantumn Physics expirements.

@krellin

Actually, my research is in computational nanoelectronics; I am very familiar with QM.

No, there is nothing simple about entanglement; it is an incredibly difficult and unintuitive phenomenon. To say otherwise is disingenuous.

Now, I will freely admit that I may not be up-to-date on the latest findings, but the last I read, there was no way to extract useful information out of entangled particles. If you have a white paper that says otherwise, I'd be very interested in reading it.

http://xkcd.com/955/

http://www.quantum.at/research/quantum-teleportation-communication-entanglement/first-quantum-teleportation.html

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/37899

http://www.qudev.ethz.ch/phys4/studentspresentations/qip/quantumTeleportationExperimentNature.pdf

Admit I have not read these particular articles...just the first 3 that appeared in Google Search. I've read a number of articles on quantum teleportation of photons....and...again...getting bored repeating the idea....if you instantaneously change the state of one particle at a distance then you have instantaneously transmitted information, even if it is only a single bit (0 or 1). That you can't grasp that 0 vs. 1 is data is beyond me. That you refute an idea that has been published multiple times in the last few years means you 1. either know this stuff has been discredited or 2. have professors that are not current on their knowledge. I'll suggest Case 2. is the case...

Tha would be funny Geofram if Abge and I were actually talking about neutrinos. But our discussion is actually about quantum "teleportation"....i.e. instananeous transfer of information via quantumly entangled photons....which has been demonstrated multiple times....and thus demonstrates FTL (faster than light) communication. ("Hey....if my photon spins different than it's original entangled state...then I just hit the switch and changed my photon to signal that I just got laid") i.e. Information CAN be contained within the change of a single bit of data...and thus quantum teleportation via entanglement is a valid FTL form of communication. It just requires a bit more (not pun intended) than an unlimited text messaging plan....

Thanks, I'll take a look at these now.

Although, once again, I don't understand why you're unable to have a civil conversation without insulting everyone involved.