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?