Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 6:11 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
#51
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
I'm curious. Would Neutrinos travelling faster-than-light account for the odd emissions observed from the SN 1987A supernova where the subatomic particles reached Earth three hours before visible light did?

Particles in physics are so darn complicated to me...
Reply
#52
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
(October 31, 2011 at 4:39 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: I'm curious. Would Neutrinos travelling faster-than-light account for the odd emissions observed from the SN 1987A supernova where the subatomic particles reached Earth three hours before visible light did?

Particles in physics are so darn complicated to me...

I was under the impression that neutrinos passing through the solar mantle would encounter far less absorption and re-emission (read as 'none') than photons would, allowing for the apparent delay of detectable light with respect to detection of the neutrinos.
Slave to the Patriarchy no more
Reply
#53
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
That's what I thought......
Reply
#54
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
Yeah , me too. [Image: eusa_shifty.gif]
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Pastafarian
Reply
#55
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
Science tends to be a consensus verdict. That is achieved after a lot of behind-the-scenes work has smoothed out the rough edges and corrected mistakes. But by passing that filtering process and going public too soon as Opera has done in this case, it can lead to embarrassing reversals and give ammunition to the critics that science cannot be trusted.
Reply
#56
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
(November 1, 2011 at 3:55 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote:
(October 31, 2011 at 4:39 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: I'm curious. Would Neutrinos travelling faster-than-light account for the odd emissions observed from the SN 1987A supernova where the subatomic particles reached Earth three hours before visible light did?

Particles in physics are so darn complicated to me...

I was under the impression that neutrinos passing through the solar mantle would encounter far less absorption and re-emission (read as 'none') than photons would, allowing for the apparent delay of detectable light with respect to detection of the neutrinos.
So... because Neutrinos hardly interact with any other matter in the universe, they maintain a constant speed of light? Whereas Photons can't?
Reply
#57
RE: Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
(November 1, 2011 at 12:52 pm)Welsh cake Wrote:
(November 1, 2011 at 3:55 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote:
(October 31, 2011 at 4:39 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: I'm curious. Would Neutrinos travelling faster-than-light account for the odd emissions observed from the SN 1987A supernova where the subatomic particles reached Earth three hours before visible light did?

Particles in physics are so darn complicated to me...

I was under the impression that neutrinos passing through the solar mantle would encounter far less absorption and re-emission (read as 'none') than photons would, allowing for the apparent delay of detectable light with respect to detection of the neutrinos.
So... because Neutrinos hardly interact with any other matter in the universe, they maintain a constant speed of light? Whereas Photons can't?


Let me clear up a couple of misconception.

1. When a supernove explodes, the first visible flash one sees from the outside do not consist of photons that travelled either directly or indirectly from the catalysm at the core center. Instead, the first flash are actually created on the outter surface of the star when shock waves from the core traveled outwards through the mantle and dumped their energy in the outter layer of the star. So the gap of few hours between when the core collapse occur - as signified by a burst of neutrinos - and when you see the brightening, is not the time it take for photons to travel through the star's mantle. It is the time taken by shockwaves that travel through the mantle.

2. The mantle of the star is opaque to photons. No photon can get created in the core, and travel all the way to the surface. Instead, it gets to travel only a fraction of a millimeter before it hits and gets absorbed by an atom. After a while, the atom reverts back to its original energy state and spits an comparable photon back out. It is this laborious process, repeated trillions of times, that gradually carries the photons emitted at the center of a star to the star's outside. This process literally takes MILLIONS of years, not several hours.


So. The photons that gets created in the core of the star does travel at speed of light, but only for tiny distances before it is stopped because photons interacts easily with anything that carries a electric charge, like electrons in all the atoms in the star.

Neutrons that gets created in the core of the star also travel at speed of light. But they interacts with comparative little, and therefore many of them do get to travel all the way through the mantle of the star without being stoped.

Incidentally, because photons created at the center of stars takes millions of years to get to the surface, the sun light shinning on you now actually owns its energy to nuclear fusion in the sun that occurred millions of years ago. Consequently, if the nuclear fusion in the center of the sun is to stop now (and somehow we prevent the core from collapsing and sending out a shock wave in response), the sun will happily shine on just the same for a few million more years, drawing on photons it created in the last few million years,


Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Did Einstein Say Light is Massive? Rhondazvous 25 3119 July 8, 2019 at 10:15 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Puzzling thing about Speed of Light/Speed of Causality vulcanlogician 25 2617 August 24, 2018 at 11:05 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  How Cn Gravity Affect Light When Light Has No Mass? Rhondazvous 18 1832 March 2, 2018 at 10:51 pm
Last Post: polymath257
  An Interesting thing About Light Rhondazvous 14 2357 October 31, 2017 at 5:33 pm
Last Post: Cyberman
  Organic Molecules Found 400 Light Years From Earth Minimalist 364 54745 August 21, 2017 at 4:35 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  Does the Higgs Boson Give Mass to Other Bosons? Rhondazvous 9 1779 August 3, 2017 at 7:36 am
Last Post: Rhondazvous
  Does the Higgs Boson Enforce the CCosmic Speed Limit Rhondazvous 14 3097 July 24, 2017 at 10:40 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  Anti-Matter at CERN chimp3 24 3325 December 21, 2016 at 7:12 am
Last Post: I_am_not_mafia
  Why Can't Anything Travel Faster than Light? Rhondazvous 48 5870 December 14, 2016 at 10:50 am
Last Post: Rhondazvous
  Physics questions about light bennyboy 10 2526 September 20, 2016 at 9:26 pm
Last Post: bennyboy



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)