4 ms·
Keep in mind that given that they said a few billionths of a second that the adjustment to c would be on the order of: (5 nanoseconds) / ((732 km) / c) = 0.0
by fleitz 15y ago
Keep in mind that given that they said a few billionths of a second that the adjustment to c would be on the order of:
(5 nanoseconds) / ((732 km) / c) = 0.000204776269 percent
update:
AP says it's 60 nanoseconds so
(60 nanoseconds) / ((732 km) / c) = 0.00245731523 percent
Also in different units:
((60 nanoseconds) / ((732 km) / c)) * c = 16 479.1646 miles per hour
Interestingly, the earth moves about 60,000 miles per hour in relation to the sun, could this be explained by frame dragging / Gravomagnetism? This is pure speculation only because the numbers are with in the same order of magnitude.
- nikcub 15y agothis isn't about adjusting c, c will always be c the speed of light in a vacuum is a known quantity, it isn't changing. this is about relativity being void
- artursapek 15y agoI think the suggestion is we've mis-measured c, and it should be redefined as the speed these Neutrinos are reaching (if it's a constant maximum)
- altrego99 15y agoSpeed of light under influence of any gravitational field is not c.
- VladRussian 15y agoas the CERN to Gran Sasso is direction from North-West to South-East, it would be interesting to see the full data as during nighttime the neutrinos would travel in the direction of the Earth traveling around Sun - thus slowed in the CERN/Gran Sasso frame - and during the day they would be moving in the opposite direction - thus they will be boosted in the CERN/Gran Sasso frame. May it be that they run experiments only during business hours ? :)
- jarin 15y agoReading around a bit I believe they used GPS to correct for anything like that. Presumably, if there were frame dragging effects they would be measurable via the GPS satellites, although that could also be the source of an error.