A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Orthodoxy's Opposition to Theories of Superluminality

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> University Hall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Perfectly Innocent
sentient bipedal physicist



Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2004 6:50 pm    Post subject: Orthodoxy's Opposition to Theories of Superluminality Reply with quote

According to Dr. John G. Cramer, Professor of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, the most accurate measurements to date for the mass of an e-neutrino are too fantastic to believe. (What is actually being measured is e-neutrino mass-squared).

John G. Cramer wrote:
Of the six most recent experimental determinations of neutrino mass, all have given negative values of the mass-squared...

The measured mass-squared values are negative to an accuracy of several standard deviations in the most recent of these experiments.

These experimenters have been strangely quiet about mass-squared measurements with negative values. If the results had been positive by the same amount, the literature would be filled with claims that a non-zero value for the neutrino mass had been established. But a negative mass-squared is not something that can be easily publicized. [1].

It's perfectly understandable why the experimental verification of "imaginary mass" for the e-neutrino particle is too embarrassing for the mainstream to take seriously. They know what it means. Why is it that I never hear physicists explaining the obvious implications? Is there a cultural taboo in the mainstream against contemplating the possibility that the electron neutrino is a tachyon and in freely discussing what are the most respectable physical assumptions to avoid causality paradoxes in the light of available data? Is orthodoxy opposed to superluminality—the anticipated, upcoming, theoretical physics of motion for objects traveling faster than light?

Why doesn't the mainstream just honestly admit what the reasonable implications of superluminality would be?

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm
Back to top
Send private message  
'); //-->
Perfectly Innocent
sentient bipedal physicist



Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 8:39 am    Post subject: The Ultimate Neutrino Page Reply with quote

Quote:
Curiously, when taken at the face value, all results point to a negative mass squared, particularly the oldest experiment. [2].

Robert Clark adds this relevant comment:

Quote:
In all the experimental attempts to determine the mass of the neutrino in tritium beta decay, the experiments all give a negative value for the mass squared of the neutrino, which indirectly indicates a superluminal speed for the neutrino. There have been about ten such experiments so far, using more than one type of experimental technique. A conventional physics explanation would have to explain why these very different experimental methods all give the same answer. —sci.physics.relativity, 1998/01/14.
Back to top
Send private message  
'); //-->
LSUPhysMan
sentient bipedal physicist



Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Posts: 8
Location: Baton Rouge, LA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:44 pm    Post subject: Re: Orthodoxy's Opposition to Theories of Superluminality Reply with quote

Perfectly Innocent wrote:
According to Dr. John G. Cramer, Professor of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, the most accurate measurements to date for the mass of an e-neutrino are too fantastic to believe. (What is actually being measured is e-neutrino mass-squared).

John G. Cramer wrote:
Of the six most recent experimental determinations of neutrino mass, all have given negative values of the mass-squared...

The measured mass-squared values are negative to an accuracy of several standard deviations in the most recent of these experiments.

These experimenters have been strangely quiet about mass-squared measurements with negative values. If the results had been positive by the same amount, the literature would be filled with claims that a non-zero value for the neutrino mass had been established. But a negative mass-squared is not something that can be easily publicized. [1].

It's perfectly understandable why the experimental verification of "imaginary mass" for the e-neutrino particle is too embarrassing for the mainstream to take seriously.

You forgot the first sentence in your first quoted paragraph:
"And this is where the interesting, although statistically shaky, results appear: "

And you left out this one:
" It is far more likely that the negative values found in the neutrino mass-squared measurements originate in some unsuspected experimental effect."
Back to top
Send private message  
'); //-->
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> University Hall All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group