|
|
 Originally Posted by wufwugy
I never studied physics so somebody answer my question please
How much science would have to be reworked if this was true? Or is this a case of people generally dogmatically believe things that haven't been disproven so when they say "nothing can be faster than light", really they're saying "nothing is faster than light so far, but if something is it's not really a problem"?
Not much. Lorentz-violating neutrino oscillations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The unconventional energy dependence in the theory leads to other novel effects, including corrections to the dispersion relations that would make neutrinos move at velocities other than the speed of light. By this mechanism neutrinos could become faster-than-light particles.
Like I said before, you're never going to throw away all those mathematical relationships that have been verified by Einstein, just like we didn't toss out Newton when Einstein came around. Shit works, it's just that the "logic" and imagery behind it might not be true to nature. Though it never really is.
A scientific theory is just a framework you translate nature into, use to calculate through space and time, then translate back into nature. When you find a model that works, then it works.
|
Reply With Quote