Is it true about the speed of neutrinos discovered at CERN?

This is not quite correct.

An experiment at CERN does appear to have shown the existence of neutrinos travelling faster than light.

This could mean that they are travelling backwards in time (although that is an oversimplified interpretation) but that is not NECESSARILY the same as "arrive at their target destination before they have left the source".

This much is true - this experiment is real, and these results appear to have occurred and been recorded

HOWEVER, there are a few things to note before throwing special relativity away.

1. The experiment has not vet been replicated with identical results elsewhere. This is a requirement of the scientific method that can't be discarded. If you can only get the results at CERN and its partner lab in Italy, and not elsewhere, then the results cannot be taken as violating a law that applies (supposedly) everywhere in the universe. Furthermore, it would be strong evidence that the experiment itself is a failure, even if they don't figure out why.

2. Other causes for the APPARENT results have not all been eliminated yet with 100% certainty.

3. Special Relativity does not forbid this.

Hang on, what's that third one? Yes, it's true. Special relativity forbids a particle being accelerated past the speed of light from less than the speed of light. That runs into problems of infinite relativistic mass, and things like that - it all falls apart. So accelerating neutrons through the speed of light to beyond should not be possible.

However, the experiment appears to show the existence of neutrinos travelling faster than light; it does not detect neutrinos BEING ACCELERATED through this "barrier".

Also, special relativity does not disallow particles travelling backwards in time. Indeed, there seems to be little if any in the way of accepted physics laws that forbid things from travelling backwards in time. All the problems with time travel derive from things like avoiding situations where a closed system has decreasing entropy and stuff like that.

I haven't read about this yet, but are you saying that the particles are in two places at once? If something is traveling at the speed of light, wouldn't that mean it only arrives at the destination so quickly that it cannot be read by the light? Also wouldn't the particle have to leave the source first to reach the destination? This is only a general judgement, considering I don't know all of Einstein's Special Relativity. Hopefully you can clarify a little more. It sounds interesting, I'm always interested to hear the things being done at CERN.

The group has asked different communities in different centers to accomplish an identical test to verify in the event that they'd reproduce the effect. till it fairly is reproduced by applying others, then the tip is basically tentative. the present group of investigators has no longer declared that this could be a sparkling discovery. it quite is between the super issues approximately technology - - an test gathers information, different experiments collect extra information to substantiate or refute the conclusions of the 1st. After a on an identical time as - and it must be a three hundred and sixty 5 days or extra - a consensus will emerge with reference to the actuality of this looking. If, definitely, others discover an identical effect - - THEN the theoreticians could have <<plenty>> of artwork to do to objective to verify why, how and what the outcomes are for different "rules" of physics. Very neat to verify the approach working. Neutrinos are ideal, and that may not the 1st time that those pesky debris have led to controversy. seem up the photograph voltaic Neutrino situation for yet another occasion.

Other laboratories have tested this with neutrinos from the same source and get less than c.

The Theory of Relativity is known to be wrong, and has been since the foundations of QM in the 1930s. Just as Newton was shown to be wrong in 1911. We didn't throw out Newton, we still teach him in school (and it costs us a lot of time retraining). We didn't throw out Relativity, we have been defining its limits for more than 100 years.

http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Rela...

Nothing gets "thrown out", except perhaps phlogiston / caloric. Something that makes errors from the outset.

Just wait another year for review of their results. In the last two months, more than 100 papers have been written on this topic, everything from "what if it is true", to "here is where they messed up".

The big upset would have occurred if no one said anything.

The OPERA experiment at CERN measured a few of billions and billion of neutrinos at seemingly faster than light. The experimenters doubted their own results; so they went public to ask for comments and critiques of their work and results. They got plenty. You can go on the web and read some yourself.

But in general, when they measured and found a few neutrinos going just slightly faster than light, they forgot to account for relativistic effects...mainly time slowing down. And here's what happens. Assume dS and dT are normal space and time. So the speed of light is dS/dT = C. But then under relativity time shrinks to dt < dT and they measured dS/dt > dS/dT = C, neutrinos going slightly faster than light speed.

Once the time dilation is taken into account, according to some of the critiques, we find that ds/dt = C = dS/dT and the super neutrinos are not so super after all. That is, space is adjusted to match the change in time interval; so the speed of light remains at the speed of light. And it remains as the universal speed limit.