• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

Anders you are so crazy. It is great.

Anders Lindman said:
As I have already said before, Einstein's theories are flawed. This result from CERN confirms it.

It's very easy to show that Einstein's special relativity is false. Two photons traveling in opposite directions have the relative velocity between them of two times the speed of light, not one time the speed of light as special relativity claims.

In this case, the emperor of science has no clothes. :D
Click to expand...

Anders you are so crazy. It is great!!!! But your premise shows you don't understand relativity. Einstein may well be proven wrong, but not by way of your approach. The speed of light is a space-time limit AND A CONSTANT IN RELATIVITY. EINSTEIN PRESENTS THIS UNCHANGING SPEED AND LIMIT AS AXIOMATIC.

The speed of a photon, relative to you, me , my car, a rocket ship, a neutrino, an alpha particle, OR ANOTHER PHOTON!, must be this constant, this space-time limit. Einstein sets this up axiomatically. This is not arbitrary however by any means.

The reason Einstein does this, presents the speed of light as a constant has to do with the "reference frame issue". It is one way to begin to address the problem that one reference frame should not, must not, be preferred to/over another.

For you to argue persuasively Anders, in a sense, you will need to convince us that one reference frame should be preferred over another. This is a difficult if not impossible thing to do.

I can be convinced, so give it a try.

I love your spunk, though believe you to be wrong. Still, I am all ears.

Best, to you in your wild adventures Anders.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
As I have already said before, Einstein's theories are flawed. This result from CERN confirms it.

It's very easy to show that Einstein's special relativity is false. Two photons traveling in opposite directions have the relative velocity between them of two times the speed of light, not one time the speed of light as special relativity claims.

In this case, the emperor of science has no clothes. :D
Click to expand...

You're obviously smarter than that Einstein fella. I can tell by your avatar.
 
Patrick1000 said:
Anders you are so crazy. It is great!!!! But your premise shows you don't understand relativity. Einstein may well be proven wrong, but not by way of your approach. The speed of light is a space-time limit AND A CONSTANT IN RELATIVITY. EINSTEIN PRESENTS THIS UNCHANGING SPEED AND LIMIT AS AXIOMATIC.

The speed of a photon, relative to you, me , my car, a rocket ship, a neutrino, an alpha particle, OR ANOTHER PHOTON!, must be this constant, this space-time limit. Einstein sets this up axiomatically. This is not arbitrary however by any means.

The reason Einstein does this, presents the speed of light as a constant has to do with the "reference frame issue". It is one way to begin to address the problem that one reference frame should not, must not, be preferred to/over another.

For you to argue persuasively Anders, in a sense, you will need to convince us that one reference frame should be preferred over another. This is a difficult if not impossible thing to do.

I can be convinced, so give it a try.

I love your spunk, though believe you to be wrong. Still, I am all ears.

Best, to you in your wild adventures Anders.
Click to expand...

Yes, my mistake. Einstein's relativity applies to the relative velocity between objects and the observer, not between objects. But here is an interesting experiment that can be tested:

In the first part of the experiment the CERN clocks at source and destination are synchronized with the satellite moving in the same direction relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured. In the second part the clocks are synchronized with the satellite moving in opposite directions relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured again. According to Einstein's Special Relativity, the two measurements will show a different speed for the neutrinos. If the same speed is measured for both parts of the experiment then that shows that Einstein's relativity is FALSE! :D
 
Anders Lindman said:
... here is an interesting experiment that can be tested:

In the first part of the experiment the CERN clocks at source and destination are synchronized with the satellite moving in the same direction relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured. In the second part the clocks are synchronized with the satellite moving in opposite directions relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured again. According to Einstein's Special Relativity, the two measurements will show a different speed for the neutrinos. If the same speed is measured for both parts of the experiment then that shows that Einstein's relativity is FALSE! :D
Click to expand...

Hold on a second! Check out this comment from another website:

"- The experiement was done 15000 times, over 3 yrs and speed measured to 6-sigma. If this 32 nanosecond error in each direction is accurately calculated and accounts for the difference that OPERA derived then consequenty, the same level of accuracy could be applied to the velocity these satelites were orbiting, the constant speed they orbited varied and the thier distance from earth should be also taken into account. This all effects measured time-space measured by the orbitor, especially when we consider the 6-sigma. The net effect would have altering neutrino measurments, over the course of 3 years, which was not the case and especially over 64 nanoseconds." -- http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...s-explained-not-so-fast-folks/#comment-429112

What does the 6-sigma mean? Does it mean that the speed of the neutrinos was measured to 64 nanoseconds for all measurements with only a slight variation?! :eek: And 15,000 experiments! With the clocks synced taking seasonal and daytime changes into account, meaning I assume also many different positions of the satellite when synchronizing the clocks, and if Einstein's Special Relativity is correct, then the measurements should have varied much more than that.

What say you? Has CERN spanked Einstein's butt or what?

ETA: Didn't CERN compensate for relativistic effects? Not according to this claim:

"Speedy neutrino mystery likely solved, relativity safe after all

... The CERN team had to account for a lot of different variables to do this, like the time that it takes for the clock signal to make it from the satellite in orbit to the ground, but they may have forgotten one critical thing: relativity.
...
Researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands went and crunched the numbers on how much relativity should have effected the experiment, and found that the correct compensation should be about 32 additional nanoseconds on each end, which neatly takes care of the 60 nanosecond speed boost that the neutrinos originally seemed to have. This all has to be peer-reviewed and confirmed, of course, but at least for now, it seems like the theory of relativity is not only safe, but confirmed once again." -- http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
Reality spanks your butt every day, Anders.
Click to expand...

I read that CERN wanted other scientists to look at the results. Doesn't this mean that the data for how the clocks were synchronized and at what times etc is public and anybody can take a look at it? So the relativistic effects will then be very easy to confirm or disprove just by looking at the data from all the 15,000 experiments.

ETA: And the data from all those experiments may be difficult to fake. If so, then I would admit that Einstein's relativity may be true after all if the CERN data shows that.
 
Last edited:
If there was such a time difference over such a short distance how big should the difference be from a Supernova?
 
Anders Lindman said:
I read that CERN wanted other scientists to look at the results. Doesn't this mean that the data for how the clocks were synchronized and at what times etc is public and anybody can take a look at it? So the relativistic effects will then be very easy to confirm or disprove just by looking at the data from all the 15,000 experiments.

ETA: And the data from all those experiments may be difficult to fake. If so, then I would admit that Einstein's relativity may be true after all if the CERN data shows that.
Click to expand...

CERN's data has been showing that every day since they powered up their first particle accelerator, if relativity was wrong they simply wouldn't work.
 
Garrison said:
CERN's data has been showing that every day since they powered up their first particle accelerator, if relativity was wrong they simply wouldn't work.
Click to expand...

But then what about this claim that has been parroted all over popular media:

"Speedy neutrino mystery likely solved, relativity safe after all

Researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands went and crunched the numbers on how much relativity should have effected the experiment, and found that the correct compensation should be about 32 additional nanoseconds on each end, which neatly takes care of the 60 nanosecond speed boost that the neutrinos originally seemed to have. This all has to be peer-reviewed and confirmed, of course, but at least for now, it seems like the theory of relativity is not only safe, but confirmed once again." -- http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php
 
Captain_Swoop said:
If there was such a time difference over such a short distance how big should the difference be from a Supernova?
Click to expand...

There are different kinds of neutrinos. They may travel at different speeds and even be interacting with each other or something like that as someone mentioned in the other thread about CERN. So the fastest neutrinos may have reached Earth years before the light, but that nobody was measuring them at that time.
 
OK Anders, I'll check it out

Anders Lindman said:
Yes, my mistake. Einstein's relativity applies to the relative velocity between objects and the observer, not between objects. But here is an interesting experiment that can be tested:

In the first part of the experiment the CERN clocks at source and destination are synchronized with the satellite moving in the same direction relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured. In the second part the clocks are synchronized with the satellite moving in opposite directions relative to the clocks and the speed of the neutrinos is measured again. According to Einstein's Special Relativity, the two measurements will show a different speed for the neutrinos. If the same speed is measured for both parts of the experiment then that shows that Einstein's relativity is FALSE! :D
Click to expand...

OK Anders, I'll check it out. Let's see what you've got. Strong work keeping the clowns honest by the way.

Patrick10000, THE SNOWFLAKE KING
 
Anders Lindman said:
But then what about this claim that has been parroted all over popular media:

"Speedy neutrino mystery likely solved, relativity safe after all

Researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands went and crunched the numbers on how much relativity should have effected the experiment, and found that the correct compensation should be about 32 additional nanoseconds on each end, which neatly takes care of the 60 nanosecond speed boost that the neutrinos originally seemed to have. This all has to be peer-reviewed and confirmed, of course, but at least for now, it seems like the theory of relativity is not only safe, but confirmed once again." -- http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php
Click to expand...

And? It appears, though it's not confirmed yet, that an explanation for the CERN data has been produced that doesn't involve FTL neutrinos. Since it flatly contradicts your basic premise I'm wondering why you brought it up?
 
Garrison said:
And? It appears, though it's not confirmed yet, that an explanation for the CERN data has been produced that doesn't involve FTL neutrinos. Since it flatly contradicts your basic premise I'm wondering why you brought it up?
Click to expand...

The comment from another website I posted earlier said: "The experiement was done 15000 times, over 3 yrs and speed measured to 6-sigma"

I would like someone to look at the CERN data to see if Einstein's relativity really made a difference in the synchronization of the clocks. What if it made no difference? Then Einstein's relativity is false if they synced the clocks with different combinations of the possible motions relative to the satellite.
 
JayUtah said:
Isn't it your job to provide evidence for your claims? Why does your denial obligate someone else?
Click to expand...

But I don't have the data from CERN. Is the data available on the Internet? And it would take a long time to understand the data and make correct calculations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom