[Geezer (OP)]

The experimental results suggest that neutrinos are "Faster than light". Why do you think that is the case?

Please provide a summary of any opinions you would like considered and we'll add them to the list of options.

You can only vote once, but you can change your vote.

I've started with a couple of suggestions to get the ball rolling.

[syhprum]

Quote from Soul Surfer

"Syhprum That is an interesting and reasonably plausible idea"

I notice that despite this endorsement from an authoritative source my suggestion has not been included in the poll ? 

[Geezer (OP)]

Quote from Soul Surfer

"Syhprum That is an interesting and reasonably plausible idea"

I notice that despite this endorsement from an authoritative source my suggestion has not been included in the poll ? 

My fault! These were only intended to be a selection.

Just post how you would like your voting option to read and we'll add it to the list.

[syhprum]

No need it has just been destroyed by Imatfaal,s logig

[JP]

I think that some sheepies were grazing on the mountain and intercepted the neutrinos.  They used their sheepy magic to speed up the neutrinos.

[simplified]

Any mass with very high energy can travel faster than light.

[grizelda]

My theory is that there is only one photon that travels infinitely fast and is thus everywhere at once. Its speed is the speed we happen to measure. Ditto for the neutrino, we measure it as having a faster speed.

[CPT ArkAngel]

Clocks are like chocolate sheep, Swiss do better...

More seriously, a missing delay in electronics or a problem of synchronization with satellites (20 meters is not that much). GPS are controlled by military people, don't ask too much... [)]

[syhprum]

Are we asking the correct question ? Should we be asking what slows down photons as they move thru inter stellar space but does not affect Neutrinos ,does the small density of gasses present provide an answer (1000 atoms/M^3), should talk we about the "new" c the speed of Neutrinos.

[MikeS]

In my original post on this subject (23-09-11)I suggested a gravitational time dilation anomaly
see http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=41198.msg367930#msg367930

It would seem I am not alone in this thought as mentioned in Nature Journal (05-10-11 based on an original paper published 28-09-11)
see http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

The experiment
see http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/arxiv/papers/1109/1109.4897.pdf
This includes details of how the timing was accomplished.

[Geezer (OP)]

Mike,

Give us some "one-liners" and we'll add them. If we keep this up long enough, somebody is sure to be right.

[MikeS]

Geezer

I voted for the gravitational time anomaly and was just explaining why.

[Nizzle]

I voted for the watches because it's closest to what I think happened: The chronometer wasn't started and stopped accurately enough

[imatfaal]

I voted for the watches because it's closest to what I think happened: The chronometer wasn't started and stopped accurately enough

  Very close to my thoughs - but I voted systematic error.  The watches are very good and easily able to time accurately enough ; the problem isn't the machinery it's the decision that signal x rather than signal y is the point at which to start or stop the clock.  The stopping seems a simple system with less assumptions (from my lay reading) but the starting the clock running seems to have lots of potential for systematic error.  Poor accuracy should lead to a blurred picture - we have a time-shifted picture, we were starting the clock 60ns late consistently

[Murchie85]

I think its just not quite easy as we think to get accurate numbers for this. I mean there is still disputes on the exact time of creation of the neutrino, maybe a math or technical problem. I don't think it represents a huge change that needs to be done on modern physics.

[yor_on]

The most interesting idea I've seen so far discuss the 'creation' of a neutrino as the effect making the 'jump'. Treating it as 'matter waves' as I presume. If that is the case maybe we can relate it to the way 'inflation' is thought to work. After all, with the 'expansion' we will have an effect where it's possible that some stars never will shine on earth, as the space 'expands' faster than light speed in a vacuum, depending on its distance from us.

And if particles is defined through their 'surrounding', then those might become different when high energies are involved at that first instant of creation? Not that I know of course But if you assume that a creation of a 'matter wave' will be as fast no matter how 'big' we later measure it to be, only energies differing its possible size?

Maybe )

[simplified]

I think its just not quite easy as we think to get accurate numbers for this. I mean there is still disputes on the exact time of creation of the neutrino, maybe a math or technical problem. I don't think it represents a huge change that needs to be done on modern physics.

Einstein's followers cannot create  modern physics without  Einstein. Therefore you will fail. []

[Geezer (OP)]

I voted for the watches because it's closest to what I think happened: The chronometer wasn't started and stopped accurately enough

It would be a bit embarrassing if it turned out that was the cause, but I suspect it's quite tricky to properly synchronize two clocks at different locations. Anyone know what the procedure is, and how much tolerance is acceptable for this experiment?

[MikeS]

Geezer

OPERA claimed six standard deviations.
See http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111005/full/news.2011.575.html

This is a PDF about the experiment as published by OPERA.
http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/arxiv/papers/1109/1109.4897.pdf

[syhprum]

If in fact photons are slowed by the small amount of inter stellar gas could this not solve the supernova event anomaly as the density of gas in the local region is about 1000 times higher than in inter galatic space