<p>Saul</a> Perlmutter awarded 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics</p>
<p>Those parking spaces on campus reserved for NL parking permits (Nobel prize winners only) are going to get even more crowded now.</p>
<p>and so the **** comparing competition between us and Stanford grows longer. >.></p>
<p>Awesome!!! 
^^ What’s that about Stanfurd?</p>
<p>PS: You’ve gotta write “Stanfurd,” that’s what we learned to do as dumb little frosh :'(</p>
<p>^ still a lvl 1 freshman it seems.</p>
<p>you write “stanFUrd”</p>
<p>^lol crowslayer def has some of the best comments on CC</p>
<p>Anyone else in Astro C10 with Filipenko?
I just got one of those mass-sent emails from him about the Prize. He basically said, in a nice, non-offensive way, that he was upset he didn’t win it as well. Apparently he played a prominent role in the research teams of 2 of the 3 Nobel Prize winners. LOL, poor guy.</p>
<p>^ Thanks, I was wondering about that. This article confirms he collaborated with the other two winners:
[Saul</a> Perlmutter Shares Gruber Cosmology Prize | College of Letters & Science](<a href=“http://ls.berkeley.edu/?q=node/514]Saul”>Internationalist Aesthetics: China and Early Soviet Culture | Letters & Science)</p>
<p>It seems he’s been overlooked by the other awards too. He is a great professor and an excellent teacher.</p>
<p>I wonder if they can revoke past Nobel Prizes. Now that the speed of light has been exceeded [url=<a href=“http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897v1][ref][/url”>[1109.4897v1] Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam][ref][/url</a>], it may be possible to disprove many of the theories that were awarded similar Nobel Prizes.</p>
<p>That would be sad to have your Prize revoked…I mean, even if it’s not true today, you can’t deny the contributions to science that they made back then. But who knows.
Anyway, about the speed of light being exceeded: I don’t know anything too in-depth about it, but in lecture a couple weeks ago, Alex Filipenko said he read most of the study that was made by the Gran Sasso scientists and said he was very doubtful of the conclusion. He explained that, because of the way the particles’ speed was measured “underground,” any small shift in tectonic plates or things of the sort could have altered the results. I think he went on to name a few other possibilities of things that could have happened that could have screwed up the results. Another one I remember was the possibility of another dimension (“like a shortcut,” he said) that the particles could have traveled through to get there faster.
Either way, he seemed willing to reject Einstein’s theories if it turned out that these particles really could travel faster the light.</p>
<p>EDIT: That’s just a thought. I was just excited to share something I had learned in lecture, lol. I’m really interested in Filipenko’s class, but I really don’t know much about physics or astronomy.</p>