3 ms·
To be precise, this latest experiment only ruled out one possible source of error (namely, bias in the detection of arriving neutrinos causing it to preferentia
by breadbox 15y ago
To be precise, this latest experiment only ruled out one possible source of error (namely, bias in the detection of arriving neutrinos causing it to preferentially detect neutrinos at the forefront of the pulse). This doesn't affirm that the neutrinos actually exceeded light-speed.
But it is an important step towards understanding what's happening, and it's great that the OPERA group were able to put together this followup experiment so quickly.
- jessriedel 15y ago> This doesn't affirm that the neutrinos actually exceeded light-speed. You might be thinking of "confirm". This certainly is an example of the OPERA group affirming their results. > Affirm. v. 1. State as a fact; assert strongly and publicly. 2. Declare one's support for; uphold or defend.
- compman775 15y agoTake a look at definition 1 in your post.
- ars 15y agoAffirm means to say it [again] (without adding any more information). It basically means "Yes I really did/do mean it". Confirm means to check again.
- burgerbrain 15y agoThe way English works, not all of the dictionary definitions for a word need to apply to any particular usage.
- topbanana 15y agoI think all dictionaries work in this way, not just English ones
- sidcool 15y agoOops...I just posted this link on my Facebook account with the sensational heading "Foundations of physics shaken again". I will remove it.
- espinchi 15y agoIndeed, as stated by the internal communication note: This test confirms the accuracy of OPERA's timing measurement, ruling out one potential source of systematic error. The new measurements do not change the initial conclusion. Nevertheless, the observed anomaly in the neutrinos' time of flight from CERN to Gran Sasso still needs further scrutiny and independent measurement before it can be refuted or confirmed.