Not So Fast: Independent Measurement Shows Neutrinos Don t Exceed Speed of Light

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Albert may still be right. An attempt to repeat an experiment that showed a subatomic particle traveling faster than the speed of light suggests that the earlier result may have erred, and that Einstein’s famed special theory of relativity remains intact.

A mostly European collaboration of physicists working on an experiment called ICARUS announced today that they had tracked neutrinos traveling from CERN, the particle physics lab outside Geneva, to the Gran Sasso National Laboratory, in an Italian mountainside. That is the same subterranean, international traverse that neutrinos make in the OPERA experiment. But unlike OPERA, which found last year that neutrinos reached Italy 60 nanoseconds faster than they would traveling at the supposedly unbreakable cosmic speed limit, ICARUS found that the neutrinos made the trip at a velocity indistinguishable from light speed. The details of the ICARUS finding have been posted to the physics preprint server arXiv.org.

"The evidence is beginning to point towards the OPERA result being an artifact of the measurement," CERN research director Sergio Bertolucci said in a prepared statement.


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.


Potential explanations for the OPERA measurement emerged last month, when researchers on the project publicly announced that two issues with GPS synchronization had come to light. Whether those GPS problems alone can explain the 60-nanosecond discrepancy between measurement and theory has not been resolved.

From the beginning, the physicists working on OPERA were careful to note that their measurement was an anomaly, quite possibly one with a mundane explanation. When they announced their confounding findings in September, they refrained from venturing into any interpretations, saying that they wanted other physicists to help scrutinize the data first. “Whatever the result, the OPERA experiment has behaved with perfect scientific integrity in opening their measurement to broad scrutiny, and inviting independent measurements,” Bertolucci said. “This is how science works."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe