this post was submitted on
743 points (58% like it)
2,628 up votes 1,885 down votes
shortlink:

pics

subscribe2,413,029 readers

5,346 users here now

Looking for an image subreddit with minimal rules? Check out /r/images

A place to share interesting photographs and pictures. Feel free to post your own, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

Spoiler code

Please mark spoilers like this:
[text here](/spoiler)

Hover over to read.

Rules

  1. No screenshots, or pictures with added or superimposed text. This includes image macros, comics, info-graphics and most diagrams. Text (e.g. a URL) serving to credit the original author is exempt.

  2. No gore or porn. NSFW content must be tagged.

  3. No personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder. Stalking & harassment will not be tolerated.

  4. No solicitation of votes (including "cake day" posts), posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor, or [FIXED] posts. DAE posts go in /r/DoesAnybodyElse. "Fixed" posts should be added as a comment to the original image.

  5. Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to an image hosting website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. URL shorteners are prohibited.

  • If your submission appears to be filtered but definitely meets the above rules, please send us a message with a link to the comments section of your post (not a direct link to the image). Don't delete it as that just makes the filter hate you!

  • If you come across any rule violations, please report the submission or message the mods and one of us will remove it!

Please also try to come up with original post titles. Submissions that use certain clichés/memes will be automatically tagged with a warning.

Links

If your post doesn't meet the above rules, consider submitting it on one of these other subreddits:

Comics  
/r/comics /r/webcomics
/r/vertical /r/f7u12
/r/ragenovels /r/AdviceAtheists
Image macros Screenshots/text
/r/lolcats /r/screenshots
/r/AdviceAnimals /r/desktops
/r/Demotivational /r/facepalm (Facebook)
/r/reactiongifs /r/DesktopDetective
Wallpaper Animals
/r/wallpaper /r/aww
/r/wallpapers /r/cats
The SFWPorn Network /r/TrollingAnimals
  /r/deadpets
  /r/birdpics
  /r/foxes
Photography Un-moderated pics
/r/photography /r/AnythingGoesPics
/r/photocritique /r/images
/r/HDR
/r/windowshots
/r/PictureChallenge
Misc New reddits
/r/misc /r/britpics
/r/gifs Imaginary Network
/r/dataisbeautiful /r/thennnow
/r/picrequests /r/SpecArt
/r/LookWhoIMet
  /r/timelinecovers
  /r/MemesIRL
  /r/OldSchoolCool
  /r/photoshopbattles

Also check out http://irc.reddit.com

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

742
743

Since the particle news came out... (i.imgur.com)

submitted ago by nThatsYUAlwaysUpvote

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on
all 117 comments
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]buttguy 39 points40 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Like Joey in the episode with the encyclopedia

[–]nThatsYUAlwaysUpvote[S] 25 points26 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

We can talk about volcanoes.

[–]DRUG_USER 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Vietnam war?

[–]GalacticNexus 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Vivisection?

[–]stony_phased 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Vaginas. Or vulvas. Let's talk about those. Please.

[–]Chaindead 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Korean war was terrible.

[–]SC0TTBL4M -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

... Oh yeah! Uh huh right... :)

[–]readthissecond 13 points14 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE CELEBRATING ABOUT!

[–]scottyrobotty 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE CALIBRATING ABOUT!

[–]neurotic_robot 6 points7 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

LOUD NOISES!

[–]enivob 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

PATRICK!

[–]ThatBaldAtheist 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Someone knowledgeable on this subject should make a post on /explainlikeimfive, if there isn't one already. It would help a lot of people understand the significance of this news in simpler terms.

[–]rossryan 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Hmm. The speed of light in a vacuum has been held for some time as the fastest anything can move in the universe. And now some Physicists are saying that it may not be. More than just saying it may not be, they ran an experiment a number of times, expecting one value, and finding a slightly smaller one.

They thought it would take 3 seconds for a ball in flight to reach the person they were tossing it to; it only took 2.8 seconds. They ran the experiment again, and the results were similar to the previous results. They ran it again, and the results were similar to the previous results. Having done this a few times, and probably having spent a fair amount of time checking to make sure their equipment is working correctly, they are now reporting the discrepancy, and asking others to verify it.

What does this mean? If it withstands continuous verification, and all normal causes are ruled out, it means we're missing something in our equations. Which means Science will focus on trying to find out why for as long as it takes to come to a satisfactory and experimentally proven answer.

It could do for Physics what the invention of the laser did for it many generations ago: open new pathways and new thinking that were previously written off as 'unreal.'

From a John Smith view of things, it means we're getting closer to building star-ships that can take you to nearby star systems for the weekend. The Disney World near Alpha Centuri is the best Disney World.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Which means Science will focus on trying to find out why for as long as it takes to come to a satisfactory and experimentally proven answer.

It is perhaps worth noting that you can't experimentally prove anything.

[–]rossryan 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Indeed. However, we can disprove things. And that tends to put us ahead of the competition.

[–]Defender 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Wait, so, you're saying that if I drop a ball over and over again, I'm not proving it will fall, just that I didn't disprove that it won't?

[–]rossryan 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

He's arguing theory versus experimental data, from what I gather.

If I throw a ball to you, and you catch it, I can prove that, as much as anything, by having him in the room, watching us, as we do it.

If I am attempting to prove the theory of gravity by throwing a ball to you, and predicting that the ball will follow a parabolic trajectory (a nice curve), as I toss it to you, I am making a mistake. It's...very hard to prove a theory when you do not know if it holds for all conditions. So, it's summed up, in layman's terms, as experimentally challenged many times, with independent scientists / people taking a crack at disproving it, and from all observations it appears to hold for the limited ranges which we have tested it with. To prove that something simple like 2 + 2 = 4 would require tremendous resources, to prove that it holds for all realities (our current one, as well as other universes / etc. were such mathematical operations may give a different result).

~Something like that.

[–]Apathetic_Aplomb 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

explainlieimfive post

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's not significant. Not yet. Ask a physicist. The answer will be "science journalism really sucks."

We'll know in about half a year :p

[–]dubman42 17 points18 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What are you talking about? Of course it's significant. CERN has had these results for months now. They have internally reviewed and analyzed their results and are now releasing them to the scientific community for scrutiny. For it to even get to this point it's kind of a big deal.

[–]RationalNT -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Source? That sounds different from what I've been hearing - but I haven't been that tuned in.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is different. He doesn't really know what he's talking about.

You know how there are ways to tell when someone who is talking about your field, has never actually worked there and probably doesn't know much about it? His post reeks of it.

[–]RationalNT 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I thought so, I just didn't know if by chance it was a typical Reddit/Mainstream bias to jump to conclusions ignoring the actual facts of the scientific revival.

I'll go back to my DSM-IV, and Journal of Abnormal Psychology now...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You kidding? "CERN"? No, it was a group of scientists that work there. There are thousands of scientists that work there. I have worked there. "CERN" doesn't do anything.

For it to get to this point is NOT a big deal. Getting published in a peer reviewed journal is the equivalent of "going official" in science. Until yesterday these results were nothing more than talk around the water cool. Extremely, extremely tantalizing talk yes, but not even controversial because there wasn't even a paper to analyze yet.

It's a "big deal" because science journalism is horrible.

[–]dubman42 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

By using the designation "CERN" I am obviously referring to the group of scientists that work there, and in this context, specifically the ones relevant to this discussion. So what's your point?

And I think it is a big deal. These scientists would not have released these findings lightly. They would not have released these findings unless they themselves were confident with the data. I would challenge your statement that this is merely water cooler talk, particularly among those directly involved in the experiment. Further, they are asking for the scientific community to confirm or deny their findings because they can't explain it. The very fact that they are asking this question, the answer to which may be that Einstein's theory of relativity is flawed, is a big deal, at least in my opinion.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

My point is, you and most other people have a misconception that "the institution known as CERN" released these results. That would give them a much higher degree of legitimacy. However, that is not the case.

In fact, the word "released" shows your unfamiliarity with the field. In physics, when something is "released" it is published. Until then, it really is just water cooler talk (it's actually group meeting talk, usually teams of 10 or so guys are working on each one of these experiments). Now, it was published yesterday. So now it really is released. Keep in mind though, it's still just a group of 10 guys who released it.

Now, their methodology was professional. It is a legitimate paper. There are no obvious mistakes. However, everyone believes that it will probably be some systematic error. That does not discount the importance of the result- but it does delay it. That's why my OP said "it's not signifcant. not yet." The not yet part being crucial. The science cycle is much slower than the news cycle. "EINSTEIN PROVEN WRONG BY CERN" is what I see on reddit, and that is simply not how the scientific process works.

It's not a crime to not be a physicist. However, the mainstream response to these events has been extremely different from the one inside the physics community. It is a bit frustrating.

[–]dubman42 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree with everything you just said. I also don't see how any of my previous comments are in contrast. And while I may not be a physicist, I am an engineer and I understand the scientific method well.

[–]ThatBaldAtheist 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I get what you're saying, but it's still a significant piece of news to me. It may not be proven, but it's still potentially important. I would rather hear about this new information in it's infancy, than not hear about it at all. I guess time will tell :)

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That it will! This is supposed to be an extremely exciting time to be a high energy particle physicist so I'm wouldn't have been surprised if a few of the experiments got into the textbooks a hundred years from now.

[–]dubman42 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

CERN is claiming to have accelerated a particle past the light speed barrier. Einstein's theory prevents this as it would require infinite energy to do so since E=MC2. This means that Einstein's Theory of Relativity has a serious flaw and our very basic understanding of how the universe works may be wrong.

How's that? Probably not a 5 year old explanation...10 maybe.

[–]Ceriq 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Correct me if I'm on the wrong path here. From what I understand, no subatomic particles that we've found yet have mass. That's why they're looking for the higgs boson, which they think will be the particle that gives mass to atoms. They fired a stream of subatomic particles called neutrinos at italy, and it got there faster than they had anticipated. But if no subatomic particles(except the fabled higgs) have mass, wouldn't the formula be e= 0*c2, meaning e would be 0 aswell. If the particles they fired were massless, then they didn't break physics and relativity. tl;dr: I suck at physics but have some ideas. Was it really breaking the speedbarrier?

[–]kntx 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

no subatomic particles that we've found yet have mass

This is wrong, they mostly have a mass. The specific particle used in this experiment (neutrino) is supposed to have a mass, althought a little one.

[–]ableman 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, this finding means that the neutrino might not have mass. The way we figured out the neutrino has mass isn't by measuring it. The old models had a massless neutrino travelling at the speed of light. The problem is that, according to relativity, particles travelling at the speed of light can't change since their internal clock is stopped. The neutrinos did change, so we figured they weren't travelling at the speed of light. Which meant they had mass (if you don't have mass and aren't travelling at the speed of light, you don't exist). Except no one knows what happens if you travel faster than light, so if it is true, you have to throw out the idea that neutrinos must have mass and try figuring it out some other way.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Einstein's theory prevents this as it would require infinite energy to do so since E=MC2

What? If you want to explain it to people, make sure you understand it first.

[–]dubman42 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I like how you invalidate my response while providing nothing to the conversation. Perhaps it's you who doesn't understand. Here.

As the speed approaches the speed of light, the particle's energy approaches infinity. Hence it should be impossible to accelerate an object with rest mass to the speed of light; also, particles with zero rest mass must always move at exactly the speed of light, since otherwise they would have no energy. This is sometimes called the "light speed barrier"

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

None of that follows from that equation.

[–]dubman42 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yes, it does. Click on the link I provided before you open your trap.

It is a consequence of relativity that the energy of a particle of rest mass m moving with speed v is given by: E = mc2/sqrt(1 - v2/c2)

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is not the same equation, pinhead. I don't need to click your link, because I study this stuff in university.

[–]dubman42 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

you should get your money back

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

God you are stubborn and thick. I won't be responding to anything else you comment.

[–]dubman42 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

likewise

[–]jjmayhem 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm trying to think of the tv show or movie that predicted E=MC2 is wrong. It was a guy from the future or something talking about it.

[–]Linuxexorcist 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

you might be thinking about transformers 2: revenge of the fallen, stop doing that

[–]jjmayhem 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No it wasn't that. Thank god.

[–]grandmoffcory -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That just blew my mind, and I'm at at least a [5].

[–]Darkjediben -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You forgot to add in the part where this does NOT mean the thing that you said it means until multiple independent tests are done to reproduce these results, and that until the results can be reproduced, this is merely an interesting anomaly.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well, actually he didn't:

| CERN is claiming to have accelerated a particle past the light speed barrier.

| CERN is claiming to have

| is claiming to

| claiming

[–]TheCodexx 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And they published it hoping someone can confirm or deny it.

I imagine those scientists are just as confused as anyone else.

[–]Darkjediben -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Followed immediately by

This means that Einstein's Theory of Relativity has a serious flaw and our very basic understanding of how the universe works may be wrong.

At the very least he implied that the findings were verified.

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]Darkjediben -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I am indeed arguing that he should have written "would mean". And everybody obviously did not get what he meant, because I didn't get it.

[–]AdviceDoctor -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I recommend you a healthy night's sleep, a glass of orange juice in the morning, and a fist full of SHUT THE FUCK UP

[–]Darkjediben 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Jeez, I've scraped better novelty accounts off the bottom of my shoe.

[–]kolm 4 points5 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There is a famous experiment showing that the speed of light will not change when you shoot the light beam off a moving lamp.

This immediately destroyed physics as people knew it, because physics was based on Newton's theory of mechanic, and in the Newton universe the speed of anything shot off a moving object would adjust in speed. Physics was, from one moment to the next, shifted from "we have a complete understanding of the world" to "we don't know anything" (okay, I exaggerate here, but it was a bit like waking up and discovering that 1+1=2 was disproved).

Then Einstein thought about it, and found a beautiful theory which allowed Newton mechanics to prevail for low velocities while explaining the strange behaviour of light. People nowadays don't believe this theory explains everything, but so far every prediction made by it about the macroscopic world proved true. It also predicts that nothing can accelerate to speeds faster than light.

If this experiment is proven to be true, than the best theory we have is out of the window, and we have to hope for another Einstein moment to find a better theory.

[–]Valiturus 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"I like... lamp."

[–]SarahGracie 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I love lamp

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

prior to this breakthrough it was thought that the speed of light was the fastest speed of anything in this universe... now it's not... and now it's theoretically possible for time travel

[–]dubman42 25 points26 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, it was previously thought that the light speed barrier could not be crossed, not that it wasn't possible to travel faster than light. In other words, particles that travel faster than light always have traveled faster than light and always will.

This finding goes way beyond just time travel. If relativity is proven to be wrong, or at least flawed, then every astronomical observation we have made - like mass, distance and energy calculations of astronomic bodies and behaviors comes into question. Our understanding of not just relativity, but dark matter, string theory, hell even quantum mechanics comes into question and will need to be revised. This is a very exciting time...that is, if these findings are accurate.

[–]scottyrobotty 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Pardon my ignorance but couldn't we say that all our astronomical observations can be considered nearly fact since nearly everything else is bound by our former light speed rules and neutrinos scarcely effect matter as we know it? Are the ramifications significant of fairly negligible?

[–]dubman42 2 points3 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I really don't know, and I don't think anyone really does. Most theoretical physics are based on the assumption that Einstein's theory of relativity was correct and up until now it has never been dis-proven. If CERN has successfully accelerated a particle past the light speed barrier it means that it does not require infinite energy to cross this threshold and Einstein's theory is seriously flawed. Assuming these findings stand up to scrutiny, any field of theoretical physics that relies on relativity will need to be revised and we will have to develop a new understanding of physics and the laws that govern the universe. It could really change our very basic understanding of how the universe works. Will it change our day to day lives? Probably not. Will we be traveling back in time to prevent the assassination of JFK? Probably not anytime soon. So I guess it depends on your definition of significant.

[–]Mattson 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If I recall correctly wasn't Newton wrong and didn't he get us to the moon? GPSes still work beautifully and without relativity they wouldn't exist.

Einstein may be wrong, or flawed as you put it, but it doesn't necessarily invalidate our progress so far... if anything it strengthens it.

[–]RationalNT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree. Newtonian physics is still taught in High School because it's "right enough" and the alternative is much more complicated.

The point being that fundamental physics accompanied with advancing technology can get us so far, and maintain us. But understanding and evolving modern physics will help advancement both in the field and in the application.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

there were/are particles that could/can travel faster than light prior to this discovery? I though light was as fast as it could get... (physics and quantum mechanics are not my field of study [obviously])

[–]dubman42 2 points3 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yes. Check out tachyons

Light speed isn't the issue, it's accelerating (or decelerating) passed it.

[–]laalaa 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Umm, tachyons are theoretical particles that have never been observed.

[–]dubman42 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Correct. Well, until now anyway.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Thanks for the informative read...

on a side note; after all these years of watching Star Trek: TNG I feel like I've been previously introduced to half of these concepts, making them easier to grasp.

[–]seagramsextradrygin -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There seem to be temporal fluctuations in the aft section of the hull. Routing energy to internal sensors.

[–]Serei 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Err, ignoring the obvious (Relativity didn't replace Newtonian mechanics, and this won't replace relativity - your astronomical observations are fine), I'd kind of consider time travel a bigger deal than just "oh, it turns out stars are slightly bigger than we thought".

[–]Shaftershafter 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Step aside... Step aside. I watched a documentary about this. If anyone needs to know about time travel I have seen all 3 back to the future movies. Im not scared of a down vote cause Marty and me are going back in time...

[–]gongwild 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh god, please don't say this. Papers have been submitted, but these results still need to be reproduced before we can start drawing conclusions and stating the theoretical implications.

[–]dubman42 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Why? We can discuss the theoretical implications prior to confirmation if we want! That's what makes this so exciting!

[–]gongwild 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No, what I'm saying is that we can't be saying that there is a paradigm shift just because of one, single result that was found at CERN. Go smoke some pot and think about all the cool things implications, man, but have some skepticism, please.

The main reason that you shouldn't believe this is that according to special relativity, a massive particle with a speed beyond the speed of light would mathematically have numerically imaginary properties such as momentum, energy, etc.

Physically impossible. The conclusion you should draw from this is that there was something wrong with the experiment.

[–]Theberzer 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Thats the thing. it was not one single result. they did sevreal tests

[–]gongwild 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

They did several tests, and got the same result. That one result. That's what I'm saying. Just because I tell a machine to give me 1 + 1 and it gives me 5 every time doesn't mean it's right.

[–]gonosis -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's also what makes it so theoretical! :D

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I do what I want! you don't know me!

but seriously though, yes I know the findings need to be confirmed then reproduced and all that jazz..

[–]Im_a_fucking_idiot 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Haha exactly, have to do the whole song and dance ... I feel so lucky to be living through this time! (Even though those who come after me can just go back and live through it as well ...)

[–]Spirkus 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

even if particles can travel faster than the speed of light does not mean that time travel is even theoretically possible, because we must firstly adjust the standard model to account for FTL neutrinos. IANAP, but even if this turns out to be true there's no sense jumping to wild concluions about one aspect of a now proven flawed system.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

no one's jumping to conclusions, just imaging the possibilities, then they get (or try to get) disproved... IT'S SCIENCE!

[–]gvsteve 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How does traveling faster than light relate to time travel?

[–]IHopeTheresCookies 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Time slows as you approach the speed of light. Theoretically, if you were to exceed it, it would start reversing.

[–]kolm 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If Relativity is wrong, then there is no reason per se why travelling faster than light would enable time travel.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

now it's theoretically possible for time travel

Woooah I wouldn't jump to that. If things are travelling faster than the speed of light, then something about the theory is wrong, so I'm not sure to what extent you can use the same theory to argue that time travel is possible. Yes, mathmatically travelling faster than the speed of light is equivalent to time travel in special relativity, but special relativity may have just been shown to not be as accurate as we thought it was.

[–]UncertainCat -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Breakthrough? Jumping the gun a bit are we?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

prior to this potential breakthrough it was thought that the speed of light was the fastest speed of anything in this universe... now it's not... and now it's theoretically possible for time travel

FTFY

[–]Harutinator 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is going to revolutionize political science

[–]RowdyRoddyPiper 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.

[–]schlemiel- 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

i'd be willing to bet that most of people on reddit that think they understand how significant it is really don't. you're just brave enough to admit it. Richard Feynman once said "I'm smart enough to know that I'm dumb."

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, people who are talking about how significant it is don't know what they are talking about. They are not associated with the physics community and don't really understand the research culture/community. Even on r/physics, it's the undergrads that aren't past their first year talking about the "significance" while everyone else is saying "slow down there boy."

For starters, the paper wasn't even published until today. we couldn't even get a crack at their methodology.

[–]dubman42 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's still fun to discuss the theoretical implications, even without confirmation. What do you care?

[–]plaingirl 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's really cool that results like these get the public interested in physics, however, I'd really like to see the public's understanding of these types of "discoveries" evolve. Other experiments are most likely going to be unable to replicate these results and CERN will probably figure out what went wrong with their measurements.

False "discoveries" happen all the time and when they do, the public starts crying foul and questioning the competence of the experimenters and the necessity of spending billions in tax payer money on the research.

I want people to be excited about physics...but I want them to be realistic in what they expect from these kinds of labs results. When these discoveries turn out to be false, I don't want anyone being so disillusioned that they start questioning the importance of funding what they mistakenly see as sloppy physics research.

Anyway, that's why I care.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I just want some scientific literacy. There is just such a massive divergence between attitudes inside and outside the physics community, I think it's too sharp for a society in the modern age.

[–]B-Rabbit 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The thing is, Einstein's theory of relativity has been tested and confirmed so many times that no one really expects the paper to be confirmed. Even the publishers are asking other scientists to find their mistake.

[–]Isthan 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"Ignorance more commonly begets confidence than knowledge."--Charles Darwin

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]noreallyimthepope 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

For more than hundred years ago Einstein (..)

You might want to edit that part. You probably started out writing "For more than a hundred years, physicists have subscribed to the Einsteinian notion that…"but changed mid-sentence to "More than a hundred years ago, Einstein…" and forgot, as happens to me often, to check back on the coherence of what you wrote.

Have a nice day :)

[–]rednecktash -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

read the rest of his post, he just sucks at english

god you're fucking shallow

[–]noreallyimthepope 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, if you read my post, you'd have noticed that I provided a speculative reason as to why he wrote the wrong thing.
If you read your post, you'll find a shallow jackass who sucks at english.

TL;DR: You're a useless jackass and add no value to the conversation. Go away.

[–]LosDog 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

so true

[–]DarcyHart 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Anyone a little concerned they'll just claim it to be untrue just so they don't have to deal with the repercussions.

[–]plaingirl 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No. Because if everything we knew about physics turned out to be wrong, then there is a ton of grant money to be had for the people who can develop our physics theories beyond the Standard Model. (That's really pessimistic of me....physicists LOVE when the physics world gets shaken up. They sort of live for these problems.)

[–]DarcyHart 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I see!

[–]BessyBossman 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I see you are all talking about quantum physics and the theory of relativity. I pay no attention, I've just found out THERE'S AN ANCHORMAN MEME! (￣▽￣)

[–]Do_It_For_The_Lols 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Can I know what this picture is from? I feel like I should know.

[–]Seruz 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy

[–]sprrd 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

[–]Con45 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You're all invited to the pants party.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

yeah, i honestly could care less

[–]hazlos 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What I have taken from it is all the previous maths are wrong.

[–]SenTedStevens 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

More importantly, where did you get that grenade?

[–]SaturdaysKids 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Everyone who understands what it means ever so slightly on reddit are making a huge deal, when it doesnt impact them at all, just to feel smart.

[–]TF2AXEMURDERER 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

words?

[–]SaturdaysKids 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

?

[–]kingsway8605 -4 points-3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Basically physics as we know it no longer exists. I suspect there is an error somewhere they are not aware of.

[–]TheHungriestHippo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

An error in the matrix? Whoa, Deja vu.

[–]plaingirl 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

They are almost certainly aware that some kind of error has occured. "Discoveries" like this happen all the time at labs. A few of the graduate students get themselves really worked up, and the rest of the lab shrugs it off, publishes, and waits until results start being confirmed by other experiments to get excited.

[–]Shitler 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What's perplexing about this "error" is that is has been happening for almost a year now, and they've finally decided to put it up for peer review after extensive verification.

[–]themarknessmonster -4 points-3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This thread is for creationists only...I'm not one myself, just making it clear for everyone else.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

π Rendered by PID 13211 on app-76 running e31913e.