Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Musings, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism, Technology > The “Loose” Cable and Neutrino Speed Measurements

The “Loose” Cable and Neutrino Speed Measurements

As some of you might have read, a recent claim by an as yet inadequately identified ‘source’ about the recent supra-luminal neutrino experiment is getting a lot of publicity. The source claims that the observed 60ns edge of neutrinos over the photon based value of ‘c’ was due to a loose fibre-optic cable in one part of the apparatus. Lots of morons and scientists are prematurely rejoicing that this ‘source’ has somehow debunked the supra-luminal neutrino experiment. However I know a few things about the pathetic and petty nature of academics and will therefore make a prediction.

The ‘loose’ cable idea is a PR stunt by some scientists to win some recognition.

Here are my reasons-

1. Let us start by assuming that a ‘loose’ fibre-optic cable is indeed the cause of the observed anomaly. But if that were so- the observed anomaly would change substantially over time from factors such as changes in intra-day room temperatures, simple mechanical displacement from handling the affected instrument or nearby ones.

However nothing of that sort can be seen in the original data. The observed anomaly was notable for being consistent over a period exceeding a year! I would find it very odd for a fortuitously loose cable to remain so unperturbed for over a year.

2. This is not the first time some pathetic loser (academic) has tried to raise objections to the data. First it was relativity and GPS satellites, then it was inadequate statistical analysis, then it was inconsistent with existent ideas about supra-luminal particles.

At some stage, a skeptical person has to wonder why many so-called scientists are so dogged in their defense of their theories. Shouldn’t theories be based on reality, rather than vice versa?

3. This is NOT the first time somebody suggested that neutrinos have supra-luminal velocities. This particular experiment was infact conducted to check similar results from a less accurate setup. Furthermore Einstein’s theories are rather sparse when it comes to the behavior of tachyons and certainly does not prohibit particles that were ‘born’ as tachyons.

Let us face it- we have no clue if neutrinos have any mass. Our current theory about neutrino having mass is based upon their ability to change from one form to another. Nobody has measured the mass of a neutrino by either direct or indirect methods, unlike similar measurements for many other subatomic particles.

That is all I have to say for now. What do you think?

Comments?

  1. February 22, 2012 at 11:35 pm | #1

    wait, wasn’t Galileo put under house arrest for being a heretic?

  2. Nestorius
    February 23, 2012 at 1:53 am | #2

    Concerning mass. Mass is nothing but a measure of the quantity of elements found in a set. E.g.: a piece of iron that contains 10000000000 atoms of iron has a higher mass than a piece of iron thar contains 10000000 atoms of iron. But the only thing that makes one thing heavier than the other is magnetic field and any other material that is causing pressure over this thing. It is very likely that magnetic field puts pressure on neutrinos, that’s why it seems to lack mass. However, since neutrinos must be formed of other yet unknown elements, it must have mass in the sense of the number of elements that compose it.

    You see, the issue is with certain terms that need to be well defined. But only an application of set theory and mathematical logic into chemistry will make things appear clearer, which is the thing I’m doing currently. But, obviously, Academia is against any progress in this case, which is why it is time to expose it.

  3. Phillippee Jacques de la Croix
    February 23, 2012 at 9:31 pm | #3

    I suspect that nature will surprise us more than a few times in the coming decades, to the ire of scientists that expected her to be fixed and consistent. Let us enjoy their perplexity and hope that their research funding is somehow diverted into our pockets, from where it will be spent on much more useful things, including delicious meals, hearty spirituous liquors, tight-skinned dames, and exceedingly comfortable bed linens.

  4. February 24, 2012 at 12:50 pm | #4

    Scientists are advocates, not judges; every famous scientist from history doggedly pursued hypotheses which were ‘disproven’ by contemporary data. Einstein famously said that – if the first experiment testing relativity were to disprove it – then the experiment itself was wrong.

    The weight of evidence will always support the ‘conservative’ theory, the status quo – because the status quo was arrived at by the weight of evidence. Even when we know the status quo is wrong, any alternative hypotheses will be ‘disproved’ by all the evidence we’ve gathered thus far.

    • Nestorius
      February 24, 2012 at 1:48 pm | #5

      It’s not the issue of whether the evidence will disprove a wrong theory or not, it’s the issue of when it’s going to disprove it. Now, having academics stand in the way of discoveries is the root of the problems now. Here is another example:
      http://www.examiner.com/architecture-design-in-national/mayas-the-usa-controversy-you-be-the-juror. These discoveries are supported by strong evidence, and despite that academics are standing in the way as the article says:

      “Although already generating approximately 81,000 “Likes” on Facebook, the article has also generated considerable controversy. A group of archaeology professors in the Southeast have vigorously objected to the article and created a separate web site to organize opposition to it. Numerous archaeologists from around North America, however, have also placed positive comments on the article.”

  1. No trackbacks yet.

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 90 other followers

%d bloggers like this: