OPERA experiment

The energy loss of OPERA neutrino, aberration, rest the anomaly.

There were only two articles I had written countering Cohen and Glashow’s famous paper that had claimed a refutation of OPERA experiment. (Where? In your dreams?)

I had written some critical reports on Van Elburg’s hilarious paper. Van Elburg’s name was removed from Wikipedia article –probably because better late than never it was realized that it was a very tenuous scientific argument this paper was based on, namely relativistic speeds were added like Newtonian kinematic adherents. To see the difference read this article of mine, written much later to the current one. 

He should have recanted his paper from ArXiv but I don’t know if he did. Science has dropped to ridiculous level and not just due to Elburg. Neither it is due to Glashow, who is a luminary and a great contributor to the causes of science.

I would be as much a follower of his, as I would be of Weinberg, my most favorite man of science of present times, perhaps. The greatest living physicist. I have ever only read one article of Glashow. He had made crap of fictitious medicinal system, if I remember, the traditional medicinal system of India came to his target of jest. I also liked a great deal how he had unabashedly bashed the string theory syndrome, at Harvard. 

I had also not liked the university’s decision to issue him a pink card. What else can they do? Watch Porno and drink beer and bash the luminaries, when they speak the truth. Although they reinstated him. How can they mess up with a great-great man.

But when I read the Glashow paper — related to the present prospective anomaly of the OPERA neutrino experimental result, I did not like certain things about it. Of-course I was smoking [green?] but that’s not why. There was something terribly wrong. The same night I read it I did an uncertainty principle calculation and found what is so missing the attention of most of the world experts, that were basking in the glory of this paper from the luminary.

I also after a few more days wrote another article that from another angle and very basic ideas of physics had the audacity to purportedly show the potential pitfalls of their paper. I haven’t read their to be published PRL paper and I do not know if its already published. So I really do not know if they fixed their errors or still basking in glory.

Here are the two articles that I wrote and I will post the salient points I made in them, so you can avoid one of the longer articles. You can read the other if you will, so you can get a flavor of the arguments to make up your mind.

Change Relativity? Is neutrino tailgating photon?

Is causality also relative, if that is so, son you hit a golden pot in physics, “that’s your causality man, that’s your problem. I don’t have a f** with that.” But you travel backwards in time. “Nay that’s how you see it, you speed blinded moron, I don’t give a damn about what you think of me. Even if I start late at home, I am gonna kick your ass man, I will reach work early. You will think I started now and came back last nanosecond but that’s because you have a sloppy watch hen hen hen”

Whats happening?

Last night I wrote a very long article and its now a featured blog on “physics” at this website. It has happened many times already. But there I told you that “speed of invariance” — invariance of speed also means speed of invariance, I changed linguistic grammar, not the physics, is broken when invariance of proper-time is broken. For photons we thought taking clue from its zero-mass we can also set the proper-time to be zero.

The physical meaning of Schwarzschild Radius. Flyby, Pioneer and OPERA anomaly.

since we are using light-speed in our theory we must make an error at the order of S-radii since by definition S-radii is the distance over which the relevant-mass does not let even light escape (read the linked article above and here: All masses behave like black-holes to some extent). SO thats (S-radii) the minimum error or speed anomaly. That is where the singularity of Theory of Relativity exists. Sun’s S-radii is 3 kms hence 3 kms/sec order error on satellites is permitted by Theory of Relativity, at the surface or away from surface the anomaly gradually drops down, as we go far from the effect of gravity, asymptotically to zero. Which is what we are seeing, the speed-anomaly of pioneer is decreasing. Except we do not go close to Sun’s surface hence we do not see 3 kms/sec. We are far away from it and seeing 1.27 mm/sec. (That is our radar is not placed on Sun’s surface but earth’s surface)

400 kms/year is not small, this millimeter accuracy is inbuilt into theory of Relativity, or it would not explain cosmology.

What to do with OPERA-II event by event neutrino information?

I was thinking, as an experimentalist, what OPERA (experimental collaboration) should now do, since they have 20 event by event neutrinos — gift just one of that to the world.

That neutrino should have the complete information one needs to compare with a photon. eg the total satellite motion — its path for about a second, since tof is about 2.43 milli-secs. Just one of the satellite, since there could be multiple. And the neutrino’s complete trajectory-profile.

By that I mean the exact baseline, as an elevation and angular deflection, all along the path. Then one can apply the Vincenty’s formula for total distance computation to milli-meter accuracy and any effect of satellite can be exactly computed.

What will result is a truer deviation, if any, of the neutrino’s speed from c=1. I am not thinking Volcanoes, although high degree temperature also causes time dilation, they will produce, far less, than the first order gravity effects.

How time dilation on GPS clocks is induced by static and spinning earth observations.

The image above shows earth at an altitude of 20200 + 9.08 km. The red line I drew is a straight line of 696 km, 3-D straight line — perhaps non-Euclidean, near the CERN – Gran Sasso Baseline, parallel to the latter, which is not straight and about 733 km long.

— Isn’t that a reason to worry?

This altitude is where the GPS satellites are “falling towards earth”.

Why should different baseline ends not introduce any error, to synchronization?

Also if we imagine 13.7 km/s at this altitude, the satellite is almost not moving. It takes 2 minutes for a deviation of 1 degree angle on earth surface — or anywhere, which is “49000 time of flights” of a neutrino bunch from CERN to Gran-Sasso.

That is, 3.54375 E-7 rad / time-of-flight.

The earth spin is 3.000823 E-2 rad / time-of-flight — earth spin being 7.292 E-5 / s.

I have shown that static earth effect is less than 1 pico-sec — special-relativistic-effect is small and negative, compared to general-relativistic-effect.

Spinning earth effect being 1% order of static earth, and earth spinning speed being E-5 orders higher, than satellite angular speed, again the “1% general relativistic effect of 1 pico-sec” will preside over the special relativistic effect, of the satellite.

So, the non-inertial effect of earth, will be ~1% of static earth, which is 1 picosecond. In other words, the total relativistic effect, of the GPS satellite, considering even earth-spin will be, within, about, 1-pico-sec.

We need not worry about this.