Andrew (Gabriel) Livshits, Jaroslav Vashchuk
Quality and reliability control and testing equipment is always determined by the level of reliability of the results of experimental tests
A few months ago, the whole scientific world has been intrigued by sensational reports of unique experiments, as it showed the excess of the speed of light neutrino flux
Our team of authors of the site Yaroslav Vashchuk, even then in his commentary and articles noted that the findings are likely participants in this experiment, early and thorough engineering analysis of all components of the test system will respond to these findings
How many times have we turned out in 2011, our conclusions and comments were correct and this is followed by a confirmation of this assumption:
... Superluminal velocity of the neutrino is the result of a bad connection of fiber-optic cable from the GPS receiver to a computer. This is with reference to its sources the official blog of the journal Science-Insider.
Once the connection has been corrected, the physics have calculated how much the optical signal passes the cable. It turned out that this figure fell to 60 nanoseconds.
In calculating the travel time from the neutrino source to the detector resulting from the experiment time is subtracted the time required to process the signal (including the pulse takes to move through the wires).
Thus, the acceleration of the system means under the same experimental data that neutrinos flying longer and no superluminal motion was not.
"This is a possible explanation, but we can not know for sure until then, until further experiments will be carried out with the beam (neutrinos)," - leading RIA Novosti words CERN spokesman James Gilles.
The first reports of superluminal neutrinos appeared September 23, 2011. Then, in the Italian laboratory at Gran Sasso scientists in the OPERA experiment to study neutrino oscillations found that muon - neutrinos from an accelerator at CERN in the coming 60 nanoseconds before the estimated time.
From this it turned out that the particles move with the speed of light 1.0000248.
After that, the website arXiv.org preprint, a large number of papers devoted to the results of OPERA.
Among them were articles in which authors have pointed to possible errors in the results. In one study, for example, argued that scientists do not take into account the motion of satellite GPS, which were used in the experiment, with respect to the neutrino flux.
This message is made all the parties concerned to return to the review and analysis of questions raised; reported and publications on this subject clarified as follows:
... Participants will re-OPERA collaboration experiments on superluminal neutrinos in May 2012. It is stated in a press release on the site CERN.
February 23 the official blog of the journal Science reported that during the inspections failed to identify a possible cause of the neutrino a superluminal velocity in the experiment in the Italian laboratory at Gran Sasso.
It turned out that a bad connection in the cable slowed down the work of a computer system and led to an underestimation of the time the motion of neutrinos (and thus increase speed).
The same day, CERN spokesman James Gilles told RIA Novosti: "This is a possible explanation, but we can not know for sure until then, until further experiments carried out with the beam (neutrinos)."
A press release from CERN says that all who participated in the organization informed of the findings.
Also, it is reported that scientists have found another possible effect which could affect the final result. It is associated with the standard rate, which was used to measure the time the motion of elementary particles.
Because of this effect (which is the essence of the message does not explain) the motion of neutrinos could be significantly overestimated (a superluminal velocity, therefore, underestimated).
The first reports on the registration of muon- neutrinos moving with superluminal velocity, appeared September 23, 2011.
Then it was found that neutrinos coming from CERN to Gran Sasso at an average of 60 nanoseconds before the estimated time. As a consequence, we find that the particles move with the speed of light 1.0000248.
Over the past few months, a large number of different explanations, both theoretical and practical.
In this regard, I would like to reiterate our views on the proper selection of control - measuring equipment and instruments and an adequate level of internal automated testing the proper functioning of all elements of control - measuring complex
Explanation for the error in the measurements referred to a bad connection in the wires, leads to the idea of design oversight and serious shortcomings in the management and control experiments
At the same time, the use of alternative parallel test technologies in real time that have been proposed in our previous publications on this subject, in our opinion could dramatically increase the reliability and validity of the results of these experiments