Do neutrinos move faster than the speed of light?

2 Oct

Quite recently, 23 Sept. 2011, CERN issued a press release reporting an anomaly in the time-of-flight of neutrinos.

The experiment, called Oscillation Project with Emulsion-Racking Apparatus (OPERA), aims to detect neutrinos obtained by smashing fast particles againts protons from the Europeans particle physics laboratory. The detector consists in a 1300-metric-ton particle detector.

Neutrinos travel underground from CERN to Grand Sasso in Italy along 732 km.

«As the particles hardly interact at all with other matter, they stream right through the ground, with only a very few striking the material in the detector and making a noticeable shower of particles.

Over 3 years, OPERA researchers timed the roughly 16,000 neutrinos that started at CERN and registered a hit in the detector. They found that, on average, the neutrinos made the 730-kilometer, 2.43-millisecond trip roughly 60 nanoseconds faster than expected if they were traveling at light speed. “It’s a straightforward time-of-flight measurement,” says Antonio Ereditato, a physicist at the University of Bern and spokesperson for the 160-member OPERA collaboration. “We measure the distance and we measure the time, and we take the ratio to get the velocity, just as you learned to do in high school.” Ereditato says the uncertainty in the measurement is 10 nanoseconds.»

Antonio Ededitato, a physicist at the University of Bern and the spokesperson of the 160 collaborators of the OPERA project, is prudent. He said “I would never say [that relativity is wrong]”. You can access the relevant papers published in the frame of the OPERA project in this site.

The problem of measuring speed is that we both need distance and time-of-flight. For the last one quantity the experimenters used the time given by Global Positioning System. The common GPS source of errors are:

  • Ephemeris errors: they occur when the satellite doesn’t correctly transmit its exact position in orbit;
  • Ionosphere conditions: when satellites travel through this region above the Earth their signal are slowed down due to the plasma medium that constitutes the ionosphere;
  • Troposphere region: it affects the signla propagation due to the variations of temperature, pressure, and humidity;
  • Timing errors: they may occur if the GPS receiver clock is not an atomic clock;
  • Multipath erros: the satellite signal can be reflected from any hard surface, sucg as buildings) and delay the travel time of the signal;
  • Poor satellite coverage.
Time and distance are measured by means of triangulation with 4 satellites. Diferent sources of errors are inherent to the method. Read here to learn more.

Science attempts to improve our vision of Nature and its working, and the speed of light is considered the maximum speed with which any meaningful signal may propagate in space. The apparent possibility that any object can travel faster than light reminds me of the famous mathematician Grothendieck, Field medal (the Nobel prize of mathematics), who disapeared sudenly in 1970 somewhere in village of the Pyrennés.

One story goes that Alexander Grothendieck is “convinced that the Devil is working to falsify the speed of light”.  Grothendieck told to Leila Schneps, wife of Pierre Lochak, both mathematicians at the Université de Paris-Jussieu, that he was willing to share his research into physics with her if she could answer one question: ‘What is a metre?’ …He refuses to work in physics sustaining that physics made possible the horror of Hiroshima. Alain Resnais made a dramatic and beautiful movie about the horror of it in his movie “Hiroshima, mon amour”, based on the work of the French writer Marguerite Duras. We always endure a catarsis when watching this movie (trailer here).

Grothendieck great contribution to mathematics  was to enlarge our concept of “geometric point”. This concept goes back to Leibniz for who the constituents of all things (material or spiritual) are monads without internal structure and it is their relationship that make the “structures”. Grothendieck concept of “point”. For this understanding we need the concept of space X: A space X described using the notion of topos T(X) of sheaves over X. A given point a is a point of X.

Despite the possible errors due to the method of measurment itself, or the methaphysical problems intrinsically related to the knowledge of the working mechanisms of nature, already some tentative explanations are advanced to explain the supraluminal effect, for example see this paper from Robert Alicki attempting to explain the effect on statistical grounds.

It is expected much ado about this effect, but for one thing I am sure, physics is well behind the development of mathematics and not taking due advantage of its progress.

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Do neutrinos move faster than the speed of light?”

  1. invitations and stationery July 11, 2013 at 8:50 am #

    Helpful info. Fortunate me I found your site unintentionally,
    and I’m surprised why this coincidence did not came about earlier! I bookmarked it.

  2. margaretjeanlangstaff November 22, 2014 at 3:11 pm #

    Good grief. I hadn’t thought about neutrinos in years. I can barely follow your post, but find it fascinating. Duck that neutrino! Whizzz. Seems they are little devils when it comes to human endeavor. Or did I (English major who loves sciece) miss the whole point? Dazzling post.

    • Mario J. Pinheiro December 11, 2014 at 7:45 pm #

      Hello, Margaret! Sorry for my long silence, but have been for a month in Beijing. It is not allowed to access Google, youtube, wordpress,…a kind of neutronic policies…Yes, neutrinos are litle devils, even when scientists attempt to understand nature….Best regards!

  3. Margaret Jean Langstaff December 11, 2014 at 8:00 pm #

    Beijing, wow. Well, all these particles! Are we sure they are real? How do we know?

    • Mario J. Pinheiro January 20, 2015 at 2:16 pm #

      Dear Margaret, thank you very much for your important question. How can we know that a particle exists? Because appropriate detectors give indications of some properties that they are supposed to have. But neutrinos are elusive particles predicted by Wolfgang Pauli in order to “save” the principle of conservation of energy (Niels Bohr suggested that in some conditions the energy principle might not work …) Nuclear physicists studied three types of radioactivity: alpha (charged helium) , beta (electrons), and gamma (high-energy light) radiation. They found that both the alpha and gamma spectrum emitted in nuclear decays were discrete, but the beta spectrum was continuous, as shown in 1930 by James Chadwick. Then, shyly, Wolfgang Pauli postulated a new particle to explain Chadwick’s observation (but he called “neutron”, the name was used later que for the nuclear particle). Three years later, Enrico Fermi called this new particle the neutrino and incorporated it in his theory of weak interaction.
      With no doubt your questions are crucial…Greetings (now) from Lisbon!

      • Margaret Jean Langstaff January 20, 2015 at 3:01 pm #

        Well, I knew scientists had their reasons and evidence, but so much of physics today (haha) seems so “iffy.” But then I’m an English major…what do I know, right? Lisbon! how amazing, I’m in Florida!

      • Mario J. Pinheiro January 20, 2015 at 3:17 pm #

        Totally agree with you. Scientists, and Physicists in particular, seem to be reinventing all over again, so long as it keeps its distacne from anything mystical or New Ageish…Yes, now in Lisbon, my home. Just in front of you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: