Relativity

[Grimer]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/ ... -neutrinos

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 9913#89913

Told you it were bollocks -

[eccentrically1]

The gravity thread is about general relativity.

[DrWhat]

I replied to this tomorrow...

[Grimer]

The gravity thread is about general relativity.

I know.

But if SR is bollocks then GR is even bigger bollocks. Bollocks standing on the shoulders of bollocks.

[Grimer]

I replied to this tomorrow...

So you did, Emmett.

[ovyyus]

The jury is still out on the findings. Frank's guess is probably wrong. Imagine that :D

[rlortie]

A six ton satellite is going to come down Friday;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15023115

Maybe this neutrinos receiver being faster than light can tell where it is likely to impact.

[Grimer]

The jury is still out on the findings. Frank's guess is probably wrong. Imagine that :D

It always amazes me that people trying to achieve perpetual motion are defenders of scientific orthodoxy.

[ovyyus]

Frank, I accept that objective reason might have no impact on a firm belief. The fact of the matter is the jury is still out because the data hasn't yet been independently tested and verified. Your words have been marked, though ;)

I'm not amazed that people trying to achieve perpetual motion might defend something they don't understand.

[eccentrically1]

But if SR is bollocks then GR is even bigger bollocks. Bollocks standing on the shoulders of bollocks.

There are only two labs than can verify the CERN findings, Fermilab, which thought they had faster than light results in 2007, but the margin of error was too large, and a lab installation Japan that was slowed in the earthquake and tsunami. Fermilab's equipment has to be updated before they can try to replicate.

GR theorizes gravity is a fictitious force; SR theorizes nothing travels faster than light and energy is mass x c^2. How are you arriving at GR is bigger bollocks than SR if neutrinos are found to be faster than light? What is the connection between the two theories that supports that statement?

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-cer ... ticle.html

[Grimer]

Celestial mechanics won't work unless the force of gravity travels faster than light. Therefore if you believe that nothing travels faster than light you have to invent some weird theory to account for gravity.

[ovyyus]

AFAIK, propagation speed of the force of gravity (if it has one) has never been directly measured. Some people develop firm belief's regardless. I guess that says more about people than it does about gravity :D

[nicbordeaux]

I'm not amazed that people trying to achieve perpetual motion might defend something they don't understand.

Amazingly funny. You'd beter copyright that one :-)

[nicbordeaux]

The margin of "error" is totally insignificant when expressed in terms of % . It my be many many miles per second, but expressed as a a fraction of the speed of light, it's nada. Well within the acceptable framework of test error.

Never forget that although breakthoughs are very occasionally made, as funding is a very large issue, spectacular findings attracting large amounts of publicity are systematically used to attract widespread interest, therefore big grants to keep the show going.

[Grimer]

Nic, the whole point of the discovery is that the percentage difference, albeit small, is NOT well within the acceptable limits of test error but well outside those limits.