It's light Jim, but not as we know it...

[d000hg]

Distance = speed * time = 299,792,458 m/s * 60 * 10^-9 seconds = 17.9875...m

We use metres and seconds in SI, not minutes. 3E8 m/s * 1E-9s = 0.3m.

[TimberWolf]

The other thing that doesn't make sense is why they didn't try neutrinos with varying energies, assuming this was an option. They were on the case for 3 years after all. What's special about the 60 nanoseconds, or 18m, discrepancy?

[TimberWolf]

We use metres and seconds in SI, not minutes. 3E8 m/s * 1E-9s = 0.3m.

I did use metres and seconds. It's 60 nanoseconds (60 * 10^-9 s), not 1 nanosecond.

[TimberWolf]

47 views and no replies. Come on, get a move on! I've got TV or something to watch.

[NickFitz]

I suspect they have simply measured something wrong

So do they, which is why they said so in the article.

Huh. And they kept this kept under wraps for 3 years? Doesn't make sense.

No, they've been doing the experiments for three years, as it said in the article.

It is a brave soul who makes such a claim in the face of a century of physics.

The results shall need to be repeated at a difference facility, different team, different equipment before such claims can be verified, surely?

Yes, which is why they said that in the article.

[scooterscot]

What's special about the 60 nanoseconds, or 18m, discrepancy?

Ok I'll have a go. Think 4 dimensions.

Light follows the curve of space-time as formed by the presence of the earth.

The neutrino, passes through mass without much effort perhaps one can assume the shape of space has not such a great influence to the path of a neutrino as it does light, thereby taking a shortcut.

[TimberWolf]

I suspect they have simply measured something wrong

So do they, which is why they said so in the article.

Actually, what they say is:

"We have high confidence in our results. We have checked and rechecked for anything that could have distorted our measurements but we found nothing," he said. "We now want colleagues to check them independently."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7KM4CW20110922

[TimberWolf]

Slightly better source here: Physics News - Physics News, Material Sciences, Science News, Physics

And some slightly better idle speculation here: CERN team claims measurement of neutrino speed >c

[TimberWolf]

It is a brave soul who makes such a claim in the face of a century of physics.

The results shall need to be repeated at a difference facility, different team, different equipment before such claims can be verified, surely?

Here's something on that:

The CERN researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.

A similar neutrino experiment at Fermilab near Chicago would be capable of running the tests, said Stavros Katsanevas, the deputy director of France's National Institute for Nuclear and Particle Physics Research.

Katsanevas, who participated in the CERN experiment, said help could also come from the T2K experiment in Japan, though that is currently on hold after the country's devastating earthquake and tsunami in March.

A faster-than-light particle? Astounding! - Technology & science - Science - msnbc.com

[TimberWolf]

It appears that GPS is used for timing and, perhaps, for the distance measurement too. Jesus.

Can Neutrinos Move Faster Than Light? | Wired Science | Wired.com