Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 25, 2011 at 4:07 comment added Ron Maimon @MSalters: The precision is only in relative GPS positions, where you move one object relative to another and compare their GPS data. This is not what you do for distant objects, and there the accuracy is not there to make this claim.
Sep 23, 2011 at 20:08 comment added UpTheCreek @Colin 'horrible quality science reporting' - too right
Sep 23, 2011 at 19:49 comment added Kevin Vermeer @Colin - You need to read the press release and official paper: The science reporting is bad, as usual, but CERN and OPERA have been very cautious and wouldn't want to publish something like this if it turned out not to be true. Don't base your opinions on the reporting, go to the original sources.
Sep 23, 2011 at 15:15 comment added Colin K I definitely believe the precision, it's the accuracy I doubted. But it los like that has been addressed as well.
Sep 23, 2011 at 14:59 comment added MSalters @ColinK: Apparently down to centimeter accuracy; they'd observed a 7 centimeter shift after an earthquake.
Sep 23, 2011 at 3:11 comment added Colin K I read that the measured travel time over hundreds of miles was about 60 nanoseconds. That's about a 60 foot path length error over hundred of miles. How well can they measure the path length? Combined with the horrible quality science reporting, I'm left quite unconvinced.
Sep 23, 2011 at 1:50 comment added AdamRedwine I admit that there would have to be changes to some of the theories and that my answer was a bit glib, but I think it does get to the real point. If no one else puts anything down, I'll come back and give some theory stuff.
Sep 22, 2011 at 21:24 comment added El'endia Starman Yeah, this is like Einstein's Theories replacing Newtonian gravity; the layperson won't be affected. But what are the specific (potential) effects on theories and such of this?
Sep 22, 2011 at 21:22 history answered AdamRedwine CC BY-SA 3.0