If the speed of neutrinos exceeds the speed of light, does the theory of relativity really need to b

If it is true, of course, the theory of relativity needs to be modified, first of all, the speed of light is the ultimate speed of the universe. However, the fact that neutrinos arrive before photons can only illustrate two problems: (1) neutrinos are faster than the speed of light.

2) Neutrinos have taken the approach route, that is, they may have shortened their distance through other cosmic spaces. Therefore, the theory of relativity cannot be easily challenged just because neutrinos appear to be faster than the speed of light on the surface, and scientists need to study more deeply to determine the truth.

If the velocity of neutrinos exceeds the speed of light, it is not that the theory of relativity needs to be rewritten, but that a new hypothesis of physical theory should be created, which will necessarily negate the basic assumption of relativity: the assumption that the speed of light does not change.

An experimental facility called Opera at the Gran Sasso National Laboratory in Italy has collected neutrinos from CERN. It is estimated that neutrinos are 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light and travel a distance of 732 kilometers. This result caused great confusion in the scientific community because it contradicted Einstein's special theory of relativity.

Einstein's special theory of relativity holds that the speed of light is the speed limit of the universe and that nothing can be faster than the speed of light. Despite academic skepticism, CERN optimized the experiment in October and began reviewing the tachyon neutrino experiment, concluding that "the new measurement method will not alter the initial results." ”

Can neutrinos be faster than the speed of light? What happens if it speeds faster than the speed of light? Is this important law of physics really going to be rewritten?

The speed of light is not the speed limit of the universe! This news not only shocked the academic community, but also caused a sensation among science enthusiasts. What is a neutrino?

What is Dark Matter? All this esoteric science has become a hot topic of discussion. To this end, the authors provide a review and brief introduction to neutrinos and their related issues.

Neutrino discovery: Searching for her thousands of neutrino discoveries date back to the late 20s of the 20th century. When scientists studied decay (the transformation of electrons from one nucleus to another), they found that some energy was lost in the process, which puzzled them:

Does the law of conservation of energy still apply in subatomic processes? Pauli, the 30-year-old Austrian physicist at the time, predicted with extraordinary intuition the law of conservation of energy: in this process, there must also be an electrically neutral and extremely small mass, and the interaction with other matter is extremely weak, and the newly released particle, that is, part of the energy it occupies, cannot be detected.

He called this unknown particle "neutrino", which is now known as neutrino.

In 1942, the American physicist Allen indirectly confirmed the existence of neutrinos for the first time through experiments based on the method proposed by the Chinese physicist Wang Ganchang. Neutrinos are difficult to detect directly because they interact weakly with matter, and Pauli himself thinks they may never be detected. However, difficulties have not hindered the progress of science.

It's not faster than the speed of light; Because scientists have proven through repeated experimental studies that the speed of light is the fastest speed in the world, there is no faster speed than the speed of light, and later after the speed of neutrinos appeared, scientists have also repeatedly demonstrated that the speed of neutrinos does not exceed the speed of light.

The speed of light is the limit of the speed of the universe, and nothing is faster than the speed of light, because the Australian Core Research Centre experimented in October and experimented again with light-speed neutrinos, and concluded that the original results were correct.

Neutrinos are not moving faster than the speed of light, because the speed of light is very fast, and there is a scientific basis for this, and it is difficult to achieve this, so I don't think neutrinos are moving faster than the speed of light.

Yes, because neutrinos are relatively fast, theoretically they can exceed the speed of light, neutrinos move at a speed of 300,000 kilometers per second, and there is a concept of anti-space-time in the universe.

First of all, the jury is still out on whether neutrinos are faster than light, because neutrinos are inherently extremely difficult to detect, and they rarely interact with ordinary matter.

Secondly, it is also necessary to verify whether the speed of light in the Earth's gravitational field is equal to the speed of light in the gravitational force of a vacuum.

Thirdly, even if it can be proved that neutrinos are indeed faster than the speed of light, the theory of relativity has not been overturned, because neutrinos are elementary particles, and whether they have a rest mass or not is still not scientifically determined, so whether they can be regarded as ordinary particles remains to be demonstrated.

Finally, if neutrinos are really faster-than-light, the success of the theory of relativity in the macrocosm will not change. I think when the quantum law was discovered, there was also a saying that the theory of relativity failed, but the macroscopic and the microscopic are originally two sides of the chasm, and the theory of relativity can only play a small role in the microscopic horizon, and the rest is the world of quantum mechanics, so if tachyon particles are discovered, then we are just closer to the real face of the universe.

Just as the theory of relativity does not overturn Newton's laws, Newton's laws still apply, but are included in the broader theory of relativity. Newton's laws can be said to be an approximation of the theory of relativity at low speeds.

The theory of relativity, which presupposes the maximum speed of light, has been completely denied in the face of neutrinos exceeding the speed of light!!

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, the mass of an object close to the speed of light is infinite, which means that it is impossible to be accelerated beyond the speed of light, which contradicts this experiment.

So there are two possibilities in the next personal estimate:

1.The results of the experiment were wrong.

2.Einstein's theory of relativity does not apply to some microscopic quantum domains, so the necessary corrections need to be made, note that it is the correction and not the relativity theory itself that is wrong, the theory of relativity has been proven to be correct in all other cases, there is no doubt about it, just as Newtonian mechanics is perfect in macroscopic and low-speed, relativity is perfect in macroscopic fields and almost all microscopic domains known now, we only need to make corrections to some microscopic quantum fields of relativity!

It can only be amended, not overturned.

In our universe, the speed of light c is the maximum velocity, and the speed of light is constant. So there is no discussion of a moving object beyond C, because it simply does not exist in our universe.

As for an object close to the speed of light, its mass increases with increasing speed, and the closer it is to the speed of light, the more the mass tends to .

Because mass is also called: "the difficulty of the movement." As the object approaches the speed of light, the more energy is required, up to e. That is, the difficulty of its movement also increases with the increase of speed, so the mass increases!

If you still don't understand, you can check out the related books.

Hope it helps!

No, you cannot. The formula of the theory of relativity states that the greater the velocity of an object, then the greater its mass, f=ma, the smaller the acceleration, and when approaching the speed of light, its mass is infinite, so that the acceleration is 0 i.e. it cannot be accelerated. What if you were to ask, if it was equal to the speed of light?

It will become an energy, a beam of light. So the maximum speed is the speed of light. Because when other matter moves to the speed of light, it becomes light.

It's a bit of a trick. But that's how it is in theory. This is not the case, and the current experimental conditions cannot be directly observed.

Formula, let the mass of the object at rest be m, and the dynamic mass of motion at velocity v is m, then there is.

m=m [1-(v c)] When v c, the denominator is infinitely small, and m is infinitely large. The kinetic energy of the object is not a classical physics formula, but ek=(m-m)c

The effect of force is mutual, right?

Slowly pushing the air with your hands, do you feel the resistance?

The fastest ones to push and feel the resistance, right?

An object that is faster than the speed of light must have momentum, and the greater the force acting on the object, the greater the reaction force.

The quality is infinite...

Albert Einstein proposed the "principle of the invariance of the speed of light", but even if the facts around us are negative, no one refutes this, on the contrary, it is necessary to assume that the speed of light is a constant quantity.

The speed of light is considered to be a constant of 300,000 kilometers per second.

So, is this constant quantity in line with the facts?

In the space of the solar system, sunlight refers to the light emitted by the sun. This speed of light may have reached Einstein's constant speed of light, or exceeded Einstein's constant speed of light a little, otherwise, no one would have admired Einstein's theory of relativity.

However, our daily life tells us that the speed of light simply cannot reach Einstein's constant speed of light. Otherwise, Einstein's theory of relativity would be seamlessly connected with Newton's classical theory.

The light we encounter in our daily lives is like this:

A low-power light can be kept on for an hour, and although it can make people within its range see the light at the same time, it cannot make people outside the range unable to see the light.

A high-powered light can be kept on for an hour, and although it can make people within its range see the light at the same time, it cannot make people outside the range unable to see the light.

However, the same thing is true for low-power lights and high-power lights, and this is the range that shines almost simultaneously; The difference between low-power lights and high-power lights is the range of light.

Therefore, we can imagine that the amount of energy released by the light source is directly proportional to the range and speed of light of the light source. However, it is impossible for a light source such as a light source to shoot the speed of light emitted by the sun, which is only a few tens of kilometers at most, because its range is only a little bit.

In the same way, we can speculate that if a light source emits more energy than the sun, then it must emit a faster light than the sun. Because the speed of light is directly proportional to the energy emitted by the light source.

It has been announced that neutrinos travel from the other side of the Earth to this side a little faster than the speed of light. But it was soon declared a mistake.

At that time, I questioned: how do they know where that neutrino came from? How do they know when the neutrinos depart? How did they catch that neutrino?

Neutrinos are a type of particle that is extremely difficult to capture, and there are countless neutrinos in the universe. The capture of neutrinos requires the construction of a large pool of water deep underground, and the light and complex photoelectric multiplication can only be found after the light and complex photoelectric multiplication amplification of the flash generated by the neutrino accidentally hitting the hydrogen atom in the deep underground, and the probability of hitting the hydrogen atom is extremely low, and the neutrino may not hit one per million neutrinos. It's only because of the sheer number of neutrinos in the universe that a few can be caught by chance.

How can you be so precise as to capture a neutrino that doesn't know when it came or where it came from? Because it's faster than the speed of light, it's impossible to find out that it's set off to notify this side, and how can you tell that the neutrino caught must be from that person's place?

Although it was an experimental error, it is important to know that quantum theory and relativity are two theories that have been applied in different fields. The expression and description of things are certainly not the same. The invariance of the speed of light and the inexorability of the speed of light are theories of relativity, while the speed of light in quantum theory is not necessarily the ultimate speed.

In the case of the photon itself, wave-particle duality means that the speed of the photon exceeds the speed of light. The speed of linear motion is the speed of light, but the photon is a curved motion, and in terms of speed, it exceeds the speed of light by I don't know how many times.

In fact, a careful study of quantum theory shows that there is no continuous space in quantum theory, and the speed from one point to another is infinite, that is, it skips instantly. Just like in a movie, there is no intermediate process.

For example, the motion of electrons around the nucleus of an atom is described by quantum theory as a probability distribution region composed of countless discontinuous probability points.

No, the speed of light is still the fastest, about 300,000 kilometers per second.

No, the experiment has been confirmed to be the result of an error by scientists and apologizes to the people of the world, in fact it is not as fast as light. The theory of relativity still holds water.

I'll say them one by one.

Einstein's theory is that if an object is moving faster than the speed of light, then time is stationary for it, or time goes backwards. "First of all, this is not his old man's theory!

Q1: No. The theory of relativity has two basic assumptions1

The principle of invariance of the speed of light 2The principle of special relativity (all laws of physics are equivalent in an inertial frame of reference, i.e., have the same form) The theory of relativity is so concise that everything else can be deduced from this. What length shrinks, time expands, mass expands.

Q2: Prove special relativity wrong? Hehe, just find the one that moves faster than the speed of light (note that there is information, and the substance that does not carry information is allowed to exceed the speed of light, which is not contrary to Einstein's old man), "no object will move faster than the speed of light" is just an assumption.

So far, no one has overturned it.

Q3: There are many mistakes in junior high school physics, and we should treat them critically. The meaning expressed in this sentence is correct, but it is a bit problematic.

As long as the resultant external force on an object is zero and has a certain initial velocity, it can always move in a straight line at a uniform velocity. This can never be proven exactly!

Okay, let's move on. All physical formulas are an approximate assumption, only to a different degree. It is impossible for all physical quantities to be precisely defined.

Physics is not like mathematics, physics is not rigorous and imprecise (of course, this error is very small, very small). In fact, these theories can never be proved correct, and theories can only be corrected to be wrong. There is no absolute right or wrong, only relative right and wrong.

All in all, a theory that can explain existing phenomena within a certain range, can make predictions, and can benefit mankind, hehe, this is a good theory. Don't care if it's hypothetical.