hupinghu's blog

As a follow-up to CERN's New "Information for World Transformation" ? appeared in 2012 Daily, we report here that there are scientists who have provided alternative explanations to the apparent faster-than-light neutrino speed reported by CERN and there are also scientists who are claiming victories over OPERA results supporting their theories.

In a paper entitled "Neutrino, flying from CERN to LNGS, and Brachistochrone" to appear in viXra preprint archive and be published in Prepsapcetime Journal shortly (links shall be provided here once available), Gunn Quznetsov provides an alternative explanation based on brachistochrone effect. His Abstract states that "[t]he result of the OPERA neutrino experiment at the underground Gran Sasso Laboratory (LNGS) is explained by the brachistochrone effect." So please check out his paper to hit the press.

In another paper entitled "On the Neutrino Opera in the CNGS Beam" which has just appeared in viXra, Armando V.D.B. Assis states that "[here], we solve the relativistic kinematics related to the intersection between a relativistic beam of particles (neutrinos, e.g.) and consecutive detectors. The gravitational effects are neglected, but the effect of the Earth rotation is taken into consideration under a simple approach in which we consider two instantaneous inertial reference frames in relation to the fixed stars: an instantaneous inertial frame of reference having got the instantaneous velocity of rotation (about the Earth axis of rotation) of the Cern at one side, the lab system of reference in which the beam propagates, and another instantaneous inertial system of reference having got the instantaneous velocity of rotation of the detectors at Gran Sasso at the other side, this latter being the system of reference of the detectors. Einstein's relativity theory provides a velocity of intersection between the beam and the detectors greater than the velocity of light in the empty space as derived in this paper, in virtue of the Earth rotation. Please read his paper for further information.

Among scientists who claim that the OPERA supports their theories are Matti Pitkanan and supporter(s) of Florentin Smarandache. Matti Pitkanen in a blog piece entitled "More about nasty superluminal neutrinos " states that " if the finding turns out to be true it will mean for TGD what Mickelson-Morley meant for special relativity." Pitkanen remarked that "[t]he reactions to the potential discovery depend on whether the person can imagine some explanation for the finding or not. In the latter case the reaction is denial: most physics bloggers have chosen this option for understandable reasons. What else could they do? The six sigma statistics does not leave much room for objections but there could of course be some very delicate systematical error involved." In his TGD theory, the OPERA results can be explained as follows: For many-sheeted space-time light velocity is assigned to light-like geodesic of space-time sheet rather than light-like geodesics of imbedding space M4×CP2. The effective velocity determined from time to travel from point A to B along different space time sheets is different and therefore also the signal velocity determined in this manner. The light-like geodesics of space-time sheet corresponds in the generic case time-like curves of the imbedding space so that the light-velocity is reduced from the maximal signal velocity. . Please his blog piece for details.

Finally, 2012 Daily also received a press-release-like piece written by Ion Patrascu. It is entitled "Scientist deduced the existence of particles with faster-than-light speeds recently discovered by CERN and states in part: "In the breaking News on September 22, 2011, in the, it is said that proven true, the laws of physics have to be re-written: Professor Florentin Smarandache from the University of New Mexico, United States, has deduced the existence of particles moving faster-than-light in a published paper called “There Is No Speed Barrier in the Universe” in 1998, as an extension of a 1972 manuscript that he presented at the Universidad de Blumenau, Brazil, in a Tour Conference on "Paradoxism in Literature and Science" in 1993. His paper is based on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox (1935), a Bohm’s paper (1951) and Bell’s Inequalities (1964). For his prediction of particles of speeds greater than the speed of light (called “Smarandache hypothesis”) and for his introduction of the Neutrosophic Logic, Set, and Probability (which are the most general and powerful logic and respectively set and probability theories today), Dr. Florentin Smarandache was awarded the Telesio-Galilei Academy Gold Medal in 2010 at the University of Pecs in Hungary." Interested readers are encouraged to read the whole piece and make judgments of their own.

Huping & Maoxin

September 28, 2011

Sep 28 '11 · Tags: cern, opera, superluminal
According a CERN News Release today (September 23, 2011), its "OPERA experiment reports anomaly in flight time of neutrinos from CERN to Gran Sasso." The anomaly indicates that neutrino may travel faster than the speed of light.

If this is independently confirmed beyond any doubt, it will be a major "Information for World Transformation" coming from CERN in the field of physics and science. We just have to wait and see.

The technical paper is here Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam in the arXiv and the Abstract states:

The OPERA neutrino experiment at the underground Gran Sasso Laboratory has measured the velocity of neutrinos from the CERN CNGS beam over a baseline of about 730 km with much higher accuracy than previous studies conducted with accelerator neutrinos. The measurement is based on high-statistics data taken by OPERA in the years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Dedicated upgrades of the CNGS timing system and of the OPERA detector, as well as a high precision geodesy campaign for the measurement of the neutrino baseline, allowed reaching comparable systematic and statistical accuracies. An early arrival time of CNGS muon neutrinos with respect to the one computed assuming the speed of light in vacuum of (60.7 \pm 6.9 (stat.) \pm 7.4 (sys.)) ns was measured. This anomaly corresponds to a relative difference of the muon neutrino velocity with respect to the speed of light (v-c)/c = (2.48 \pm 0.28 (stat.) \pm 0.30 (sys.)) \times 10-5.

Over at viXra Log Philip E. Gibbs has done a wonderful job to keep us informed with his blog post "Can Neutrinos be Superluminal? Ask OPERA!".

Huping & Maoxin

September 23, 2011
Sep 23 '11 · 5 comments · Tags: cern, opera, neutrino

According to CERN - the European Organization for Nuclear Research, "[o]ur understanding of the Universe is about to change..." by the Large Hadron Collider. This is certainly true.

The key to this change is whether LHC will discover the Higgs Boson of the Standard Model or any Higgs Boson. According to Dr. Philip E. Gibbs who has done tremendous work to keep both the scientific community and general public informed, "Higgs boson hints are still alive. What is particularly interesting now is the bump at 140 GeV. Some people said that this excess came mostly from the WW channel, yet when the WW channel is removed the bump is still there with nearly 2-sigma significance. The two bumps peaking at 118 GeV and 128 GeV are also the right size for a Higgs signal but error bands are still too big. Any of these bumps could be statistical fluctuations but it is very unlikely that they all are. With current data available in the high-resolution channels it is not yet possible to draw robust conclusions, but I think I have demonstrated that this will be the best way to find the Higgs with future data. I hope the experimenters will take note and produce similar plots from the official data. Updated results with 2.5/fb could appear within weeks and we will see where the three candidate bumps are heading."

The absence of Higgs Boson will have dramatic effect on our understanding of the Universe. In that case, we have to rebuild our models of particle physics from scratch.

It should be pointed out here that Higgs boson was dubbed as the “God Particle” by Leon Lederman and hyped as such by the media. To many of us, Higgs boson should not be called the “God Particle. The genuine “God particle” should have at least the following explanatory powers:

a) Explanation of the creations of bosons and fermions; b) Explanation of gravitatonal force; c) Explanation of the strong force; d) Explanation of the weak force; e) Explanation of the electromagnetic force; f) Explanation of the origin of the Universe; g) Explanation of or relation to Consciousness; and h) Etc.

We are in the super-connected Age of Internet and technological wonders made possible through science. There is no doubt that we are also at the dawn of a brave New World in particle physics and science overall. Every genuine truth seeker should seize this moment. What we have witnessed so far is the rise of collaborative spirit in physics. We urge all genuine truth seekers to work together to make the brave New World a reality.

Huping & Maoxin

September 22, 2011

Sep 22 '11 · Tags: lhc, higgs boson, god particle
This is indeed our (Huping & Maoxin) first blog piece. When time permits, we plan to write on the following subjects plus more:

1. Why 2012 is important for World transformation.
2. What is Scientific GOD and why it is important.
3. What is not Scientific GOD and how to avoid being pseudo.
4. Sciurch is a new pathway to truth and unity in the age of Science and Technology.
5. What is consciousness.
6. Why consciousness transformation is the key to World Transformation.
7. How to transform one's consciousness.
8. Principle of existence in plain language.
9. Mathematical "Proof" of [Scientific] GOD.
10. Experimental Evidence of [Scientific] GOD.
11. Mystical Experience of [Scientific] GOD.
12. Scientific GOD by reason.
13. Why faith is important but dogma and fundamentalism should be avoided.
14. The imperfections of materialistic science.
15. How to modernize/transform our current science.
16. Several pieces on other Scholars' related work.
17. The diversity of religious traditions and their spiritual foundations.
18. Religious traditions are to be kept, respected but in certain aspects be modernized.
19. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Christian.
20. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Muslim.
21. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Confucian.
22. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Hindu.
23. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Buddhist.
24. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Taoist/Daoist.
25. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Yoruba[ist].
26. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Judaism[ist].
27. What is and [how to become a] Scientific Atheist/Reasonist.
28. Religious history of China.
29. China in transformation.
30. Why China need Scientific GOD.
31. One World One Dream under Scientific GOD (New Internationale).
32. Information for World Transformation recap.

Of course, we may not write these pieces in the order listed above. And more importantly, all members on the 2012 Community are welcomed and encouraged to write on these important topics.

Humbly yours,

Huping & Maoxin

Dated September 21, 2011
Sep 21 '11 · Tags: scientific god, 2012, world transformation
Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

Have you seen the sub-atoms of your body?

No, yet you believe that they exist;

Have you felt the strong force that holds the sub-atoms together?

No, yet you know that they must be there;

Have you seen the atoms of a virus invading your body?

No, yet you have no doubt that they exist.

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

Have you seen the Earth on which we reside?

Yes, yet you deny that there was a Builder.

Have you felt the air that you breathe?

Yes, yet you doubt that there is a Provider,

Have you seen your body on which your faculties reside?

Yes, yet you don’t believe that there is a Creator.

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

Time has come for you to search the footprint of Scientific GOD,

Would you rather live in denial?

You are the scientific vessel its Creator would like to hitch a ride,

Would you deny ITS pleasure to do just that?

Through all of us Scientific GOD manifests,

Would you rather be in idle? 

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

If GOD now reveals how IT breathes life into equations?

Would you still deny that IT exists?

If GOD now reveals how IT designs the laws governing particles?

Would you then still deny that IT’s the basis of natural laws?

If GOD now reveals how IT creates, sustains and makes evolve matters?

Would you still deny that IT’s the foundation of science?
Sep 17 '11 · Tags: science, god, atheist