Do neutrinos have mass?

photons carry energy, yet they are massless

That's the exception and that's because they travel at lightspeed. Neutrinos don't so they are bond to have a mass.

Didnt CERN show that Neutrinos travel marginally faster than light?

Whats the difference? Hahaha but seriouly u have a fetus penis if u have to ask this

No that was a mistake with the GPS mesurement, the journalists got carried away like they do all the time.

Also this is semi-related :
what-if.xkcd.com/73/

It was a mistake. Disconfirmed since
It's basically impossible due to the laws of physics (at least to our knowledge so far). If the observation was correct, both of Einsteins theories of relativity would be disproven

No they didn't

You'll make an fine garbage collector someday.

>implying there's a difference between mass and energy

lmaoing @ ur life kid

Isn't it the other way around? They can travel at lightspeed because they are massless? The mass increases the faster a particle goes, so nothing which has mass can go at a lightspeed, because it would gain infinite mass, and to do so it would need infinite energy. So being able to have mass is something different from having energy. Do I think right?

So therefore if its confirmed that it travels below the speed of light then that is evidence that it has mass because relativity?

So if it has mass, why doesnt it interact with basically anything?

because it's a neutral particle?

Even light which is confirmed massless will collide with just about any material. Its got my simple brain stumped how this thing can fire straight through my body thousands of times a second without leaving a trace.

Electrically neutral... like a neutron?

Im pretty sure they interact with most things.

>guy with no understanding of physics tells a guy who states current understanding that he'll be a garbage man

Astro fag here, good luck working in a grocery store.

maybe it leaves, but we can't detect it yet

Mass is overrated.

>confirmed
Do you even know how science works?

Underrated post

It would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate an object to lightspeed, since the time which it moves away dialates (due to the special theory of relativity (basically light has to move at the same speed for you as a guy moving the other direction from you, so time and space dialates instaed)), making you essentially have to accelerate infinetly in order to move away from an object at lightspeed. The reason light moves at light speed, is because it has no mass, hence it takes no energy to accelerate it. Which is why it moves at the upper limit of speeds.

>why doesnt it interact with basically anything
It does interact with quarks. Often changing the charge of a quark making neautrons into protons and changing atoms into different atoms
Like carbon14 into nitrogen14 (the basis of carbon dating)

Yea it would

>looks like you don't understand the meaning of infinity

brain blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaast

He probably meant very small.

as mass equals to energy everything that has mass can be equalized in energy and vice versa
so the answere should be nes / jo

thats what she said

this is why OP will never accelerate

>do neutrinos have mass?
implying neutrinos exist
posting a picture with the game rules for pushing coloured balls between 3 people

They do because oscillations

It does leave a trace, its called cancer

what exactly are neutrinos?
explain it to someone who beleived protons, neutrons and electrons to be the smalest parts in universe

Nice maymay

Plausible?