Print 51 comment(s) - last by QES.. on Nov 8 at 10:06 AM

New theory describes faster than light travel, could explain CERN's results

Some of the greatest physicists of the twentieth century, including Albert Einstein, consider the speed of light a sort of universal "speed limit".  But over the past couple decades physicists theorized that it should be possible to break this law and get away with it -- to travel faster than the speed of light.

I. CERN Results Potentially Described

One of several possible routes to faster-than-light travel was potentially demonstrated when researchers at CERN, the European physics organization known for maintaining the Large Hadron Collider, sent high-energy particles through the Earth's crust from Geneva, Switzerland to INFN Gran Sasso Laboratory in Italy.  In a result that is today highly controversial, the team claimed that the particles were observed travelling in excess of the speed of light.

Now physics theory may finally be catching up.  Math researchers at the University of Adelaide -- located in the middle South of Australia -- have developed new formulas to describe the relationship between energy, mass, and velocity (which incorporates length and time) for objects traveling faster than the speed of light.  The formulas modify Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity, a fundamental pillar of our understanding of the universe.

Einstein Theory of Special Relativity
Einstein formulated his Theory of Special Relativity in 1905. [Image Source: AP]

Math professor Jim Hill, a co-author of the paper writes, "Questions have since been raised over the experimental results [from CERN] but we were already well on our way to successfully formulating a theory of special relativity, applicable to relative velocities in excess of the speed of light."

He elaborates, "Our approach is a natural and logical extension of the Einstein Theory of Special Relativity, and produces anticipated formulae without the need for imaginary numbers or complicated physics."

The study's other co-author, Dr. Barry Cox, adds, "We are mathematicians, not physicists, so we've approached this problem from a theoretical mathematical perspective... Our paper doesn't try and explain how this could be achieved, just how equations of motion might operate in such regimes."

II. Placating the Critics

The authors obviously recognize the controversy surrounding both experimental and theoretical work regarding challenging the light speed limitation attached to the special theory of relativity.  Write the authors in the abstract, "In this highly controversial topic, our particular purpose is not to enter into the merits of existing theories, but rather to present a succinct and carefully reasoned account of a new aspect of Einstein's theory of special relativity, which properly allows for faster than light motion."

Hyperlightspeed travel
Many believe faster-than-light travel may be possible. [Image Source: LucasFilm, Ltd.]

The paper proposes two sets of equations -- one based on an invariant set of "frame transitions", the other based on a "frame transition" with the invariance limitation removed.  The authors suspect that if faster than light travel is possible, that the physical behavior of the faster-than-light travelling object is described by one of these equations.

Note, such work is relatively independent from forms of faster-than-light travel that do not violate Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity, such as warping space via a massive energy source.

The paper was published [abstract] in the prestigious peer-reviews journal The Proceedings of the Royal Society A.

Source: RSPA

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

CERN results
By Florinator on 10/12/2012 2:28:01 PM , Rating: 3
I thought this was sorted out already as a measuring error, caused by an improperly plugged in connector or something like that, if I remember correctly...

RE: CERN results
By JasonMick on 10/12/2012 2:35:26 PM , Rating: 1
I thought this was sorted out already as a measuring error, caused by an improperly plugged in connector or something like that, if I remember correctly...

AFAIK, they're now considered "uncertain", not "disproven", as there were two errors -- one of which could have led to overestimation, and one to underestimation...

Either way, the equations developed by the Australian authors could apply to other FTL (faster than light) scenarios aside from the one classified by CERN. They openly admit there's debate over whether there's any proven evidence of such scenarios existing; they're just using math to derive what reality might look like if they did.

Still interesting either way from a theoretical perspective as long as you don't get too carried away...

RE: CERN results
By geddarkstorm on 10/12/2012 3:30:22 PM , Rating: 3
A lot of potential breakthroughs towards FTL are occurring lately. It's fascinating, but also gives us hope we're slowly approaching the discovery of a new branch of physics that'll allow FTL after all.

In which case... who's up for some diamond planet prospecting :D?

RE: CERN results
By ipay on 10/12/12, Rating: 0
RE: CERN results
By FITCamaro on 10/12/2012 4:25:41 PM , Rating: 5
Because wikipedia is a college accepted reference source.

RE: CERN results
By ipay on 10/12/2012 4:27:19 PM , Rating: 1
Because Wikipedia links to college accepted reference sources.

RE: CERN results
By SPOOFE on 10/12/2012 4:42:04 PM , Rating: 2
Better than an 8-month old WSJ article that, oh yeah, EXPLICITLY POINTS HOW THAT THEY HAD EQUIPMENT ERRORS.

RE: CERN results
By Schadenfroh on 10/12/2012 9:36:56 PM , Rating: 1
Wikipedia is our civilization's collective consciousness, by insulting our ever evolving mind, you might have earned a place among wikipedia's page on Luddites.

RE: CERN results
By ipay on 10/14/2012 2:44:16 AM , Rating: 4
Wikipedia being downvoted on Daily Tech (a Jason Mick article no less) for not being a trustworthy source of information? Oh the irony...

RE: CERN results
By FaaR on 10/13/2012 10:11:44 AM , Rating: 2
Jason, the Swiss-Italian results have never been replicated by another group (and I don't think it's for lack of trying), so it's quite safe to say that their neutrino results were erroneous.

We haven't observed any (provably) faster-than-light neutrinos in real life either, I might add.

RE: CERN results
By bug77 on 10/12/2012 4:06:19 PM , Rating: 2
Last I checked, the anomaly was traced back to improperly synchronized clocks and the matter was settled - the neutrinos did not surpass the speed of light.

"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki