New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Why Neutrinos Might Wimp Out

Particles that go beyond light speed? Not so fast, many theoretical physicists say

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In case you missed the news, a team of physicists reported in September that the tiny subatomic particles known as neutrinos could violate the cosmic speed limit set by Einstein’s special theory of relativity. The researchers, working on an experiment called OPERA, beamed neutrinos through the earth’s crust, from CERN, the laboratory for particle physics near Geneva, to Gran Sasso National Laboratory in L’Aquila, Italy, an underground physics lab. According to the scientists’ estimates, the neutrinos arrived at their destination around 60 nanoseconds quicker than the speed of light.

Experts urged caution, especially because an earlier measurement of neutrino velocity had indicated, to high precision and accuracy, that neutrinos do respect the cosmic speed limit. In a terse paper posted online on September 29, Andrew Cohen and Sheldon Glashow of Boston University calculated that any neutrinos traveling faster than light would lose energy after emitting, and leaving behind, a trail of slower particles that would be absorbed by the earth’s crust. This trace would be analogous to a sonic boom left behind by a supersonic fighter jet.

Yet the neutrinos detected at Gran Sasso were just as energetic as when they left Switzerland, Cohen and Glashow point out, casting doubt on the veracity of the speed measurements. “When all particles have the same maximal attainable velocity, it is not possible for one particle to lose energy by emitting another,” Cohen explains. “But if the maximal velocities of the particles involved are not all the same,” then it can happen.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


An effect of this type is well known in cases where electrons have the higher speed limit (light speed), and light itself has the lower one because it is slowed down by traveling in a medium, such as water or air. Electrons, then, can move in the medium at a speed higher than the maximum speed of photons in the same medium and can lose energy by emitting photons. This transfer of energy between particles with different speed limits is called Cherenkov radiation, and it makes the reactor pools of nuclear power stations glow with a bluish light.

In the neutrinos’ case, Cohen and Glashow calculate that the wake would mostly consist of electrons paired with their antimatter twins, positrons. Crucially, the rate of production of these electron-positron pairs is such that a typical superluminal neutrino emitted at CERN would lose most of its energy before reaching Gran Sasso. Then again, perhaps they were not superluminal to begin with.

“I think this seals the case,” says Lawrence M. Krauss, a theoretical physicist at Arizona State University. “It is a very good paper.” So was Albert Einstein right after all? Einstein’s relativity superseded Isaac Newton’s physics, and physicists will no doubt keep trying to find glitches in Einstein’s theories, too. “We never stop testing our ideas,” Cohen says. “Even those that have been establish­ed well.”

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe