RE: Neutrinos still travel faster than light
November 22, 2011 at 7:57 am
(This post was last modified: November 22, 2011 at 8:03 am by little_monkey.)
(November 21, 2011 at 9:13 pm)IATIA Wrote:(November 21, 2011 at 8:51 pm)little_monkey Wrote:(November 20, 2011 at 9:06 pm)IATIA Wrote: At the speed of light, time stops for the mover. Beyond the speed of light, time reverses for the mover. Would this affect the aging of the mover? Technically, it would stand to reason so, but I have yet to find anything on this particular idea.
The problem here is that the mass of the mover would have to be ZERO.
Particles. Some particles age, though most have mass. Assuming an aging massless particle traveling FTL, would it 'unage'?
Particles, massive or massless, don't age. Thet can decay into other particles. For instance the proton is supposed to decay theoretically at once every 1032 years, which is longer than the age of the universe. So, as far as we are concerned, protons are stable (ageless in your terms).
(November 21, 2011 at 10:26 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:(November 21, 2011 at 8:51 pm)little_monkey Wrote: The problem here is that the mass of the mover would have to be ZERO.
What about imaginary?
Those are the tachyons. In String Theory, they are particles that can be exchanged by branes of higher dimensions.
(November 22, 2011 at 12:52 am)theVOID Wrote: There is a much more pressing reason NOT to believe this finding,
This paper has pretty much nailed the error in the OPERA`s findings.
