Thread: So what is the implications of matter exceeding the speed of light?

And no one forced them to go public as far as I know.

I watched the live webcast from CERN when they showed the design and results of their experiment to an assembly of the foremost minds in physics and, eh, er, stuff. (and that assembly had already been briefed with all that info) The purpose of the meeting was to take them through it and then to answer questions like 'have you thought of this?', 'did you do that?', 'how do you explain the other?', 'did you allow for Summer time?'.
They aquitted themselves well over 40(?) minutes of questions and discussion, and no-one came up with anything obvious (or even obscure) to negate the conclusions they had come to from analysing the data. One thing that came out of it was the refinement of the experiment which they are going to run.

Originally Posted by JFalz1024

Well played, but this is a stain none the less. I don't expect every scientist to be flawless in their approach to experiments, however I expect a group of them running a test 16,000 times to be a little more efficient. Saying otherwise seems foolish.

I couldn't agree more...

Originally Posted by tom

Well this is my problem with the mainstream .... in MY OPINION ...<rant> what seems to happen is that everyone "freaks out" then they come up with a reason as to why they got the results they did and why it does not disagree with the current model. It some aspects it is like an upsidedown pyramid ... where the theory needs to get tweaked so many times just so that the theory holds ... </rant>

In order to tweak the theory, they'd have to do so in a way that doesn't contradict all the other results obtained from all the other related experiments and tests.