The OPERA neutrino velocity result and the synchronisation of clocks

Contaldi, C. R.

doi:10.48550/arxiv.1109.6160

Cited by 15 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The scientific community has produced a plethora of works to interpret the puzzling neutrino speed result. These works were based on some systematic errors caused by the Earth's motion (Monderen 2011) or errors in synchronization of clocks by either a third clock moving into the gravitational field of Earth (Contaldi 2011) or GPS satellites (van Elburg 2011), which were 1 http://proj-cngs.web.cern.ch/proj-cngs/ later reviewed (Besida 2011, Armando V.D.B. Assis 2011 2 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are OPERA neutrinos faster than light because of non-inertial reference frames?

Germanà

2012

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Recent results from the OPERA experiment reported a neutrino beam traveling faster than light. The challenging experiment measured the neutrino time of flight (TOF) over a baseline from the CERN to the Gran Sasso site, concluding that the neutrino beam arrives ∼60 ns earlier than a light ray would do. Because the result, if confirmed, has an enormous impact on science, it might be worth double-checking the time definitions with respect to the non-inertial system in which the neutrino travel time was measured. An observer with a clock measuring the proper time τ free of non-inertial effects is the one located at the solar system barycenter (SSB).Aims. Potential problems in the OPERA data analysis connected with the definition of the reference frame and time synchronization are emphasized. We aim to investigate the synchronization of non-inertial clocks on Earth by relating this time to the proper time of an inertial observer at SSB. Methods. The Tempo2 software was used to time-stamp events observed on the geoid with respect to the SSB inertial observer time. Results. Neutrino results from OPERA might carry the fingerprint of non-inertial effects because they are timed by terrestrial clocks. The CERN-Gran Sasso clock synchronization is accomplished by applying corrections that depend on special and general relativistic time dilation effects at the clocks, depending on the position of the clocks in the solar system gravitational well. As a consequence, TOF distributions are centered on values shorter by tens of nanoseconds than expected, integrating over a period from April to December, longer if otherwise. It is worth remarking that the OPERA runs have always been carried out from April/May to November. Conclusions. If the analysis by Tempo2 holds for the OPERA experiment, the excellent measurement by the OPERA collaboration will turn into a proof of the general relativity theory in a weak field approximation. The analysis presented here is falsifiable because it predicts that performing the experiment from January to March/April, the neutrino beam will be detected to arrive ∼50 ns later than light.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are OPERA neutrinos faster than light because of non-inertial reference frames?

Germanà

2012

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Last paper of the OPERA collaboration [2] generates a lot of reactions and comments about the observation of the advance of 60.7 ns of the neutrino beam coming from the CERN compared to the time of travel given by the speed of light. One of these comments was given by Contaldi [1], explaining the advance by an effect of general relativity for travelling atomic clocks. Three errors and misunderstanding by the author of this article [1] are detailed here: one is an angular definition, the second is a missing term and third a misunderstanding of the method used by OPERA and CERN to continuously resynchronize their atomic clocks with GPS devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of these comments was given by Contaldi [1], explaining the advance by an effect of general relativity for travelling atomic clocks. Three errors and misunderstanding by the author of this article [1] are detailed here: one is an angular definition, the second is a missing term and third a misunderstanding of the method used by OPERA and CERN to continuously resynchronize their atomic clocks with GPS devices. Thus the supposed correction of ∆t ≈ 30 ns [1] is shown to be irrelevant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Three errors in the article: "The OPERA neutrino velocity result and the synchronisation of clocks"

Besida

2011

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We found three mistakes in the article " The OPERA neutrino velocity result and the synchronisation of clocks" by Contaldi [1]. First, the definition of the angle of the latitude in the geoid description leads to a prolate spheroid (rugby ball shape) instead of an oblate spheroid with the usual equatorial flattening. Second, Contaldi forgot a cosine of the latitude in the centripetal contribution term. And last but not least, a profound conceptual mistake was done in believing that an atomic clock or any timekeeper apparatus was carried in a journey by car or plane between CERN and Gran Sasso; instead of that atomic clocks are continuously resynchronized through a GPS device, and the variation of the potential term applies only for the neutrino travel itself. Thus instead of a ∆t ≈ 30ns correction claimed by the author in a travel of 12 hours plus 4 days at rest for an atomic clock, we have found a time correction only for the neutrino itself ∆t = 3.88 10 −16 s! That means, that this paper [1] does not give the right explanation why the neutrino is seen travelling faster than the speed of light in the OPERA neutrino experiment.

show abstract

“…It is possible that OPERA's claimed discovery [1] of a superluminal muon-type neutrino does not come from the violation of Lorentz invariance but from unknown factors in the clock-synchronization process [2] or from a purely statistical effect [3]. In fact, it has been shown [4] that OPERA's claimed value (v νµ −c)/c ∼ 10 −5 is ruled out by the expected but unobserved energy losses from electron-positron-pair emission (ν µ → ν µ + e − + e + ), at least, as long as there exists a preferred frame from the Lorentz violation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Superluminal neutrino and spontaneous breaking of Lorentz invariance

Klinkhamer

Volovik

2012

Jetp Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generally speaking, the existence of a superluminal neutrino can be attributed either to re-entrant Lorentz violation at ultralow energy from intrinsic Lorentz violation at ultrahigh energy or to spontaneous breaking of fundamental Lorentz invariance (possibly by the formation of a fermionic condensate). Re-entrant Lorentz violation in the neutrino sector has been discussed elsewhere. Here, the focus is on mechanisms of spontaneous symmetry breaking. It is possible that OPERA's claimed discovery [1] of a superluminal muon-type neutrino does not come from the violation of Lorentz invariance but from unknown factors in the clock-synchronization process [2] or from a purely statistical effect [3]. In fact, it has been shown [4] that OPERA's claimed value (v νµ −c)/c ∼ 10 −5 is ruled out by the expected but unobserved energy losses from electron-positron-pair emission (ν µ → ν µ + e − + e + ), at least, as long as there exists a preferred frame from the Lorentz violation. Still, the claim by OPERA has provided new impetus for the discussion on the possible sources of Lorentz violation. In order to engage in this discussion, let us assume that OPERA's result is correct qualitatively (existence of a superluminal muon-neutrino) even if not quantitatively (most likely, |v νµ − c|/c ≪ 10 −5 ). Condensed-matter physics, which possesses an analog of Lorentz invariance (LI), now suggests several different scenarios of Lorentz violation (LV). Among them are: (1a) LI is not a fundamental symmetry but an approximate symmetry which emerges at low energies and is violated at ultrahigh energies (cf. [5]). (1b) Intrinsic LV at ultrahigh energies gives an emergent Lorentz-invariant theory at lower energies but ultimately, at or below an ultralow energy scale, induces a re-entrant violation of LI (see, e.g., Sec. 12.4 of [6]).(2) LI is fundamental but broken spontaneously (see, e.g., [7,8] and references therein).In this Letter, we discuss the spontaneous breaking of Lorentz invariance (SBLI), that is, the spontaneous appearance of a preferred frame in the vacuum, which can be derived from Lorentz-invariant physical laws. The order parameter of SBLI can be a vector field b α (for example, the vector field of Fermi-point splitting [9,10] or an aether-type velocity field [11]), an emergent tetrad-type field e α a [12,13,14,15], or any other field which is covariant but not invariant under Lorentz transformations.If SBLI occurs only in the neutrino sector, which interacts weakly with the charged-matter sector, then SBLI has no direct impact on this other matter (certain indirect quantum-loop effects can be suppressed by near-zero mixing angles). The non-neutrino matter essentially does not feel the existence of the preferred reference frame. In fact, it is very well possible that SBLI occurs only for the neutrino field, because the other fermions have already experienced electroweak symme-1

show abstract

The OPERA neutrino velocity result and the synchronisation of clocks

Cited by 15 publications

References 10 publications

Are OPERA neutrinos faster than light because of non-inertial reference frames?

Are OPERA neutrinos faster than light because of non-inertial reference frames?

Three errors in the article: "The OPERA neutrino velocity result and the synchronisation of clocks"

Superluminal neutrino and spontaneous breaking of Lorentz invariance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About