CERN Faster Than Light Neutrino Experiment

In September 2011, the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) conducted an experiment that needed to be understood correctly. However, many years later (even today), the experiment remains a mystery.

The general idea of the experiment comes from CERN's possibility of producing a power beam of protons that later transforms into a beam of neutrinos by a specific device.

The idea seems quite appealing at first glance. The neutrino beam propagates through the Earth's crust for many miles until it reaches the other point of measurement (OPERA). OPERA stands for the Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus.

It was an edge experiment because it was the first time anyone had conducted a similar experiment. Moreover, they used the one-way method of measurement because the neutrino beam went in one direction only (forward) without backward propagation.

From the beginning, the experiment had some fundamental problems at the theoretical level. The first problem comes from the idea of measurement. Usually, any speed can be determined by the indication of a clock. The difference in indications of the same clock at the end and at the start of the measurement gives the observer the value of some duration associated with the experiment.

It looks suitable for any experiment that can be observed optically. However, the neutrino beam covers a big distance during the experiment, and optical observation of that beam becomes impossible. Moreover, the neutrino beam's speed should be close to the speed of light. Therefore, any signal that can be returned from the second measurement point should use a similar duration. As a result, the observable duration almost doubles.

It is possible to use two clocks to determine the duration of neutrino beam propagation. However, that method has one critical problem: possible clock synchronization makes the experiment useless if both clocks are read casually.

Scientists met the full-scale problem that way. Moreover, no one has tried to use physical "time" to synchronize two clocks located remotely. That problem comes from the human illusion of physical time (see ref # 1). Two or more clocks should not be "synchronized" ever in case of the existence of physical time. In that case, any number of clocks should be turned on. After that, physical interaction between physical time and those clocks sets an indication that each clock has the same value.

However, nobody ever seen such action from a clock. It never shows that way of action. In other words, a clock needs another clock to be "synchronized" with it artificially. Moreover, "another" clock has to be also synchronized with "another" clock and so on to infinity until "the first clock" should be "synchronized" with the human mind.

For example, the midday comes as soon as the Sun crosses the celestial meridian in the sky. Humankind casually picked up that condition, among many other physical processes. It is artificially used to set up the indication of a clock.

CERN scientists have encountered the same problem of clock synchronization. They desperately need a “clock” that can be used at both the CERN and OPERA points of measurement.

They soon found such a clock. It was a satellite clock that sent an electromagnetic signal with information about its indication. That clock is usually understood as an onboard clock of a GPS satellite (GPS means Global Positioning System).

A GPS satellite sends information about an indication of its internal clock toward the Earth with other technical details. As a result, two observers located remotely on the Earth's surface can use that signal and have information about the satellite clock's indication. Apparently, the satellite sends the same information in all directions. However, observers never have the same signal simultaneously because each observer has a unique distance from the satellite. The following picture graphically shows the idea of the experiment.

CERN faster than light neutrino experiment

CERN is located at point A, OPERA at point B, and the satellite at point S. Points A and B receive the satellite signals. Here, the problem begins.

The distance SA is unequal to the distance SB. Therefore, the satellite signal with the "time mark" reaches these points in some sequence. According to the figure, the signal reaches point A sooner than point B. That situation led to a fundamental problem of clock synchronization.

The problem does not appear as soon as both measurement points use a satellite located at an equal distance from each end. In that case, both clocks can be set to the same indication according to the moment of the satellite signal arrival.

However, GPS satellites were never constructed to support such an idea. Moreover, they are always in motion, so their position relative to Earth-bound points of measurement changes with each measurement.

They "solved" the problem by following some steps to set both clocks at the same indication "simultaneously."

1. Both points decide the satellite that should be used for "synchronization."

2. Both points decide on the exact signal for "synchronization" (indication of the satellite clock)

3. Both points wait for that signal.

4. As soon as each point receives that signal, it makes some calculations.

5. That calculation includes determining the satellite location relative to the point of measurement.

6. After that, another calculation circle determines the duration of the one-way propagation of the electromagnetic signal from the satellite to the point of measurement by the current distance to the satellite.

7. The calculated result was used to set an indication of the local atomic clock to an exact value before the experiment.

8. CERN makes proton emission from point A, and the OPERA makes neutrino detection at the point B

9. Both points determine the speed of neutrino beams in the Earth's crust by indicating that clocks are "synchronized" that way.

From a common point of view, those steps of "synchronization" look obvious to some people. However, that sequence does not show any "correlation" with the Aurora Effect. The following picture shows that case.

a cross-section of the Aurora ellipsoid

As explained above (see ref. # 2), two Earth-bound clocks with a measuring channel between them never meet an orientation in which the measuring signal spends an equal duration in both directions. In other words,

Therefore, step six mentioned above becomes wrong. It determines the duration of signal propagation by deciding that signal propagation has equal duration in both directions. However, that point of view is incorrect (see ref. # 2).

According to the optical observations of the Solar system, it moves in the reference frame of fixed stars toward the North hemisphere (motion of the Earth in space). In that case, the Absolute Velocity Vector (AVV) makes a negative projection on the measuring instrument that sends signals toward the South. In other words,

According to the figure, that case coincides with distances E1-B, E2-B, E3-B, etc. That distance is ever lesser than the distance the signal covers in the opposite direction (A-E1, for example). However, no neutrino beam comes back during the experiment. As a result, the duration of the one-way measurement was less than the expected duration, which is equal to the mean duration of a round-trip experiment. Therefore, the experiment shows a predictable result of one-way measurement (and a ground-breaking result for modern physics).