### In search of violations

This week high-energy physics published some interesting results for our fundamental knowledge of the universe. On 14th November, LHCb published the preliminar analysis about a possible CP-violation in charm decays (see also the CERN's Bulletin and Mat Charles' presentation).
The researches about CP-violations are very important because in this way we can argue the differences between matter and anti-matter. If a physics law is CP-invariant, we must write that the beahvior of matter and anti-matter is the same. But our universe is constituted by matter and we don't know why it is so. The answer could be in CP-violation studies, like the preliminary data analyzed by LHCb team. The main goal of the experiment is the search of the properties of quark b, but he could also measure the properties of quark c. And studying the preliminary data about c decays the team find a clue of a CP-violation in a non expected channel. Following Tommaso Dorigo and Marco Delmastro (english translation by Google), if the result will be confirmed by further analysis, this could be the first sign of physics beyond Standard Model.
The other possible violation is the wall of the speed of light: indeed, OPERA experiment confirm their previous data. Yesterday, in the updated version of their famous preprint, OPERA's researchers described a new serie of measures realized with CNGS using a short-bunch wide-spacing beam.
The new measures confirms the previous observations: some superluminal neutrinos arrive in OPERA's detector. Their advance is $62.1 \pm 3.7$ ns for the bunched beam test and $57.8 \pm 7.8$ ns for the main analysis. We can see the distribution of $\delta t$ in the second analysis in the following plot:
About this result, Giovanni Fiorentini from Ferrara's INFN say to Le Scienze, the italian counterpart of Scientific American:
But the glass is half empty because the neutrinos' beams are very close when they leave and they should be short also when they arrive: on the contrary, it likes that some of them flight a little more and others a little less, as if gthere was a scattering; this probably reflects the fact that the temporal resolution of OPERA's detector isn't nanosecond, but this is a bit worse than expected, altough not so much to affect the result: we can say than the test has been well at 70 percent but not 100 percent
But following Philip Plait:
However, they used the same timing apparatus, and a lot of people - me included - think this is where the problem lies. They need to figure out a way of making that more transparent and perhaps using a different timing method.
So we must wait MINOS team: they are preparing experiment to perform a new measure of neutrinos timo of flight.
Nature's blog
Tommaso Dorigo
Sascha Vongehr
The neutrino's saga on Doc Madhattan:
News from the OPERA
Probably not
Waiting supeluminal neutrinos: from Maxwell to Einstein
Waiting the superluminal neutrinos (if they exist!)