Article #82
Subject: Poem
Author: Andrew W. Harrell
Posted: 9/22/2011 09:38:08 PM

A Poem

About

A Particle Travelling Faster Than Light!

A particle travelling faster than light?
It must be very bright…or maybe dark?
Is it speeding at a differing rate?
Has it mass, occupying space?
Where does it come from, the past?
…travelling that fast.
Or maybe from the future, already there?
…and here.
One thing to think about, that particle…
What if it’s me?
Then, when I got to where I’d been,
I’d neither know what’s here, or when.
I’d have to be just what I’d be
until the Truth of all of it had settled in.
And, are there two?
And, is it time, at last, for one
to be the first forevermore?
Or in the all-when then shall
we never break that highest speed
to let another finish first, and win… again?
Why doubt it!

Article #251
Subject: 2012 Asimov debate on this topic
Author: Andrew W. Harrell
Posted: 3/29/2015 12:01:29 PM

Notes from the internet U-Tube video on Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate 2012
(when this video debate was conducting the final verification of the
existence of the
Higgs Boson had not happened)
Due to the long and perservering hard work of many physicists,
mathematicians, statisticians,
Electrical engineers, computer scientists, knowledge of the existence of this
fundamental building block
In our understanding of our universe is now a reality.
Debate topic:
“Faster than Light Particles and testing the fundamental physics”
David Cline Prof. of Physics UCLA
John (Gian) Guidice Particle Physicist at CERN
Seldon Glashow Prof. of Theoretical Phyics Nobel Prize Winner
Christopher Hagarty US Government GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) expert,
MITRE Corporation
Laura Patrizii Dpt. Of Physics U. of Bologna
Gabriella Gonzales Prof. of Physics (gravitational waves) LSU works at the
LIGO (long inferometer measuring gravitational oscillation) in LA
Classical mechancis has proven to be true because we have mapped out its
domain of validity. And are now testing it at the boundaries of its validity.
This is our current definition of “truth” of a physical theory. Glashow
Classical and General Relativity are also currently looking pretty good in
this sense. We are currently testing its boundaries by rippling space and
time. They are changing the distance between the earth and the sun by about
an atomic diameter. We are trying to measure these distances and energy
shifts. We have currently (2012) eliminated any possibilities that are
greater than a part in a thousand of these scales Laura
Dr. Hagaraty is using satellites going thousands of miles an hour to measure
some of these effects. Special relativistic effects (slowing up time) are
actually less than general relavistically effects (speeding up time by a
factor of about 6 greater). Currently these effects are accounted for in our
present GPS location measurement. Neglecting them over a long period of time
can lead to errors of up to 10 kilometers in determination of positions on
the earth from these satellites.
Dr. Glashow made the interesting point that without the theory of General
Relativity we wouldn’t have GPS.

Question by Neil, “Can we use GPS to test the limits of validity of General
Relativity”.
Answer by Chris, “Yes” its already being done.
Back to Neutreinos.
OPERA Oscillation Project with Tracking Apparatus
Gian (John) In 2012 many physics were trying to reconcile the results of
measuring time of travel of particles from CERN in Switzerland to another
laboratory down in Italy. 732 kilometers 60 ft off of what was expected.
About 60 nanoseconds maybe. After a few months this seemed impossible unless
they travelled faster than light.
Laura further explained that a faulty connection in the experiment was
uncovered later and this will probably reconcile the differences and the
result is not what it first seemed.
Dr. Cline has coauthored a paper, using a liquid Argon detector and an
experiment called ICARUS, published March 2012, explaining this, showing the
neutreinos arrive exactly on time. Moreover no positron emission was observed
as would be if they were travelling faster than light.
However, this all assumes Prof. Glashow’s theory is correct[ here he is
referring to the Standard Model of Physics developed by Glashow I believe].
He (and Dr. Glashow who said his formulas are not a theory but have been
tested already) are willing to bet a bottle of wine on it.
Gian made the comment that the experiment, OPERA, was much more than
measuring the limits of measurement of the speed of neutrenios: “the zipper
that keeps together space and time is the speed of light so all of this
concerns both special and general relativity”
Neil made the comment “what about tachyons which are faster than light.” [you
might want to read Dr. Feynman’s book and lectures on General Relativity on
these] Dr. Glashow said it is hard to complain about particles that don’t
exist.
“We have already verified General and Special Relativity to 20 decimal places
and now they are saying that it is all wrong to 5 decimal places.
Impossible!”
Gian then said, that, some of these questions are about the “beauty” of the
theory and not its consistency.
“why can we send electromagnetic waves long distances and not the weak force
particles?” “The answer is the Higgs Boson.”
“In order to answer this we have to deal with probabilities and
statistics” “At this time the statistical reliability of the existence of the
Higgs Boson is not high enough to claim its existence [my note to this
prediction….this later happened, the probabilities were enough, in fact].”
“particle physicists believe that gravity is irrelevant to the standard model…
string theorists might disagreed, but fortunately there are no string
theorists here.”
Laura [although she is not a string theorist] in fact disagreed
here. “Gravity is one of the four forces, the weakest, but its very strong
near neutron stars and black holes, and we are measuring effects at LIGO that
have never been seen before. That’s what will give us a clue about physics
and nature.”
How does quantum mechanics come into these questions?
Neil made the statement about Quantum mechanics, “somebody through you a
basketball and you catch a football…that quantum mechanics”

Dr. Cline said, You have to think of Occam’s Razor here, “you have to think
of the simplest explanation”
“Experiments take so long now, a good part of your life, you don’t want to go
after some wild crazy idea. And this tells me that this charming young lady
is wrong”
Laura replied, “are we not allowed to be wrong? We will see what is true and
what is not. the most important thing is to be honest”
Reply to this: “we all have the right to be wrong. It may not be your fault
but having a huge press conference might confuse and mess up our young
scientists forever. Science is about getting things right”
Questions from the audience:
Gian agreed with David, Dr. Cline, that now there is more media attention to
physcists, we need to be more careful about how we appear to others.
Neil thinks that all of this is good for what he calls the “Asimov concept”
of more public discussion of science.
Dr. Glashow said he was happy to hear of something beyond his current
Standard Model, unfortunately it turned out that it doesn’t exist.

Might understanding neutrenos better help us to understand dark matter, dark
energy string theory better? Dr. Cline said, their mass is so small probably
not w.r.t. dark matter, dark energy, and he doesn’t know enough to speak
about this w.r.t string theory.
Someone of the audience, said w.r.t. worrying about the effect of this on
young students, he is one and that thinking about it inspires him more rather
than confusing him