Academia, Science

Bad Opera: Scientists Now Believe A Bad Oscillator May Have Slowed Speeds of Subatomic Particles

First, Einstein was right. Then he was wrong. Then he was right due to a loose wire. Now he may have been wrong due to an oscillator. Many of us would just throw up our hands and say everything is relative with Einstein, but scientists at OPERA say that a second equipment problem may have led to a too conservative reading of the 730-kilometer journey of the neutrinos reported by the European Organization for Nuclear Research or CERN.

The oscillator is used to provide time stamps to synchronize the GPS systems which measure the travel time. The scientists believe that the oscillator problem may have canceled out the cable problem . . . and that the little neutrinos did move faster than the speed of light — beyond the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792 kilometers per second). That would contradict Einstein’s theory. So I guess we have to treat Einstein like a big dummy again . . . absent another loose cable or spilled coffee cup.

I am just waiting for a finding that neutrinos are sentient with a wicked sense of humor . . . and hovering around 299,791 kilometers per second just to mess with us.
Source: CBC

342 thoughts on “Bad Opera: Scientists Now Believe A Bad Oscillator May Have Slowed Speeds of Subatomic Particles”

  1. Bdaman:

    dont you know that Gene and Elaine have a solar power and wind power agenda? Their agenda is funded by hot air to run wind turbines.

    If AGW can be scientifically verified, then solar, wind and fuel cell technology will reap billions of dollars in profits. Those greedy people, no wonder they want to prove AGW and I imagine they arent above lying to make that happen. What with literally hundreds of billions of dollars in the balance. That greedy profit motive rears its ugly head everywhere. You just cant trust anyone who wants to make a profit to give you the truth.

    Talk about getting rid of the competition, use government funds to eliminate the competition so you have a clear playing field. Then you can create a monopoly in solar, wind and fuel cell technology run by only a handful of government sanctioned firms and charge huge service fees since you are the only game in town as far as energy goes.

    I bet Gene and Elaine have stock in some of those green power companies and stand to make millions of dollars if this works out. How could we trust them to be honest about this subject? They probably have a huge financial stake in th outcome. They will say they dont, but you cant trust people who are only in it for the money.

    Gene is right, greed is bad. Especially when it is someone else’s.

  2. Bdaman,

    Oops. Your oil funded agenda is showing. If you know what the mitigation is, then your asking the question while trying to claim AGW isn’t a real phenomena is self-contradictory at best and disingenuous at worst (probably both).

  3. and like Katherine Hayhoe and others they understand the scientific process because they are not deniers.

  4. Gene I also suggest you read the congressional testimony given by James Hansen 1988 he is one of the worlds leading climate scientist.

  5. Gene I suggest you read here http://www.350.org/

    350 means safety from the climate crisis.

    To preserve our planet, scientists tell us we must reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from its current level of 392 parts per million (“ppm”)to below 350 ppm. But 350 is more than a number—it’s a symbol of where we need to head as a planet.

  7. Lets take a look at Hayhoe and her region and what the so called other experts said verses reality.

    Lamont-Doherty Researcher: Southwest Headed for Permanent Drought

    Aerial view of Lake Powell in Arizona. The prominent white rings surrounding the edges of the cliffs are due to steadily receding water levels.

    http://news.columbia.edu/record/2294

  9. “I have seen special forces guys take a gun away from a man. They make it look pretty easy. Now if the guy is 20′ away he would have to be a good shot but might have a little better chance.”

    And you think this tactic is low risk? Also, try more like 10′. Any time the opponent with a gun is outside your immediate reach, the chance of disarming them without getting harmed goes down drastically.

    “What is the solution to stop Climate Change/Global Warming and why.”

    Your homework is to figure out why these are two distinct questions. If you understood why, you’d know how natural variability and feedback factor into the phenomena. Climate change is inevitable (from the action of plate tectonics if nothing else). AGW is an exacerbating factor on destabilization that could lead to climate shift, which is not the same thing as climate change. Climate change as a natural process changes slowly over time without a supervening cause like the eruption of the Siberian Traps. When a supervening factor causes sudden and severe climate change, that is climate shift. The release of ash, CO2 and other greenhouse gases caused by the eruption of the Siberian Traps caused the Permian-Triassic extinction. The global weather suddenly and drastically changed. This is the same risk AGW creates, slower than a massive yet natural supervening event but faster than the other natural processes driving climate change in general. The goal isn’t stopping climate change. That’s impossible. The goal is to reduce the man-made impact that is demonstrably starting to destabilize the weather patterns. Will AGW cause a extinction level event? Unlikely unless a nuclear war breaks out. Will it eventually cause a lot of death and destruction from changing the hydrosphere, atmosphere and our ability to live in coastal areas and to raise crops? It will if we don’t reign it in. The “solution” is to do what we can to maximize our sustainability as a species as climate change happens naturally and not to exacerbate change or hasten a shift.

  10. Ms Elaine one need only look to Ms. Hayhoe’s predictions of Climate Change in Texas vs what actually happens after she makes her predictions to see she absolutely FULL OF SHIT. Thats why she was dropped from Newts book. Every time she makes a claim the exact opposite happens.

  11. Still showing that you can’t tell the difference between AGW (a human driven impact on the the environment) and climate change (a naturally occurring process that is exacerbated by AGW), Bdaman.

    AGW is a human driven theory that if we don’t act now the climate will change and cause more droughts more floods more hurricanes more typhoons more volcanoes to erupt more earthquakes the coral reefs to disintegrate because of acidity more tornadoes ….. on and on and on and on and on.

  17. I suppose that the weather changes cause carnival cruise line to have another malady…..

  20. The next question while you work on that will be what is natural variability and what is a positive feedback.

    I’m only asking because your smarter than a 5th grader.

Comments are closed.