At the very least, the guys who made this announcement are responsible for what happens as a result of the way they've announced it … which seems pretty cavalier, IMHO.
Cheers
The researchers are being responsible, it's the idiotic press that needs to be reeled in.
From the report.
Quote:
Despite the large significance of the measurement reported here and the stability of the analysis, the potentially great impact of the result motivates the continuation of our studies in order to investigate possible still unknown systematic effects that could explain the observed anomaly. We deliberately do not attempt any theoretical or phenomenological interpretation of the results.
Yep .. I suppose so, Steven … The BBC report goes like this …
Quote:
The team measured the travel times of neutrino bunches some 15,000 times, and have reached a level of statistical significance that in scientific circles would count as a formal discovery.
But the group understands that what are known as "systematic errors" could easily make an erroneous result look like a breaking of the ultimate speed limit, and that has motivated them to publish their measurements.
"My dream would be that another, independent experiment finds the same thing - then I would be relieved," Dr Ereditato said.
But for now, he explained, "we are not claiming things, we want just to be helped by the community in understanding our crazy result - because it is crazy".
"And of course the consequences can be very serious."
Still, I don't understand why they had to release it all to the general public?
Surely if you want some peer scrutiny, you collaborate at peer level??
They've even released the data to the public, (I understand).
Why take this approach ?
The above quote makes him sound like a saint .. couched in all those "this is crazy" type nonsense ! If its crazy then find someone at your peer level who can make sense of it .. you won't get that from the general public !
Sounds to me like if it turns out to be a valid measurement, this mob are setting themselves up for the Nobel !
Still, I don't understand why they had to release it all to the general public?
Surely if you want some peer scrutiny, you collaborate at peer level??
They've even released the data to the public, (I understand).
Why take this approach ?
The above quote makes him sound like a saint .. couched in all those "this is crazy" type nonsense ! If its crazy then find someone at your peer level who can make sense of it .. you won't get that from the general public !
Sounds to me like if it turns out to be a valid measurement, this mob are setting themselves up for the Nobel !
Cheers
Their behaviour is not out of the ordinary. Reporting to the press before a peer review process isn't new, the cold fusion fiasco is a case in point.
There were rumours circulating about a week ago and reported by some physics bloggers, so it appears the scientific community had wind of what was going on before the public.
Leaving aside the Quantum Field theory considerations tachyons don't violate SR. Tachyons form a symmetrical theory of SR where the speed of light is a lower limit instead of an upper limit.
I can see the dreamers in this world already going ballistic ie: around the web, today … with this news !
At the very least, the guys who made this announcement are responsible for what happens as a result of the way they've announced it … which seems pretty cavalier, IMHO.
Cheers
He basically reiterated what I had said previously.
I still don't buy it... But I'd love to know that it is true! I love neutrinos and these fundamental particles and their ability to puzzle us. But as I've just written to Suzy Webb, where there's smoke...
I agree that those scientists must take reponsability on what they have announced. Let's wait and see...
Thanks Denise, as always I appreciate your input.
Many of us including Denise have been talking about it on facebook.
I'm just sitting back and listening to what you guys are saying and remaining healthily skeptical but can't help feeling a rush of excitement all the same. My mind like many others is spinning at a large rate because of this information.
I thought some of you'll may be interested in what Brian Cox might have to say on the matter (no swoon gestures from me this time as I have my serious astro hat on ).
It Does seem an unusual way to ask for help or confirmation from other reseachers? and as others have said without the paper being peer reviewed
I remain sceptical untill further evedence is forthcoming
Cheers
Thanks Denise, as always I appreciate your input.
Many of us including Denise have been talking about it on facebook.
I'm just sitting back and listening to what you guys are saying and remaining healthily skeptical but can't help feeling a rush of excitement all the same. My mind like many others is spinning at a large rate because of this information.
I thought some of you'll may be interested in what Brian Cox might have to say on the matter (no swoon gestures from me this time as I have my serious astro hat on ).
Steven,
Oh my gosh!
That man needs a good shower!
....wanders what the correct answer is
That's not you is it Steven
Because if it is, its a lose - lose situation for me.
I have to say tho, looks are a very nice bonus, but not necessary. For that man to be taken seriously- he would at least need to have a shower and look somewhat respectable if he's to be a public figure; never mind the hair. He would not be allowed on tv looking like that- there's no where to dab studio make up on. Guys have to wear makeup and look presentable on tv.
Lawrence Krauss is a bit hard on my eye (don't tell Shelley), but I still enjoy watching/listening to him.
TO EVERYONE: Steven made me talk about Brian against my will.
I have to say tho, looks are a very nice bonus, but not necessary. For that man to be taken seriously- he would at least need to have a shower and look somewhat respectable if he's to be a public figure; never mind the hair. He would not be allowed on tv looking like that- there's no where to dab studio make up on. Guys have to wear makeup and look presentable on tv.
So, apart from the make-up, how did else did Cox make it on to TV ?
A call for independent verification was a common refrain among physicists reacting to the news. That will happen in two steps, they said.
...
The next step will be to duplicate the neutrino experiment in another laboratory, which could happen within months.
But there are only two facilities currently operational capable of carrying out such tests, said Weber.
One is at the national Fermilab outside Chicago, where the 2007 effort -- part of a project called MINOS -- hinted at faster-than-light speeds but fell within the margin of error.
"We are already thinking about upgrades that would allow us to make competitive measurements," said Weber.
The other site is in Japan, where an international team of physicists last year detected neutrinos that had travelled the width of Honshu island to the giant Super-Kamiokande underground detector.
"Science by press release" has a very bad history. Think: cold fusion, the Martian "Canals", the meteorite supposed to have evidence for life on Mars.
More interesting than when a difficult experiment comes up with a radical result that may or may not be true, is when two very careful studies come up with contradictory results e.g. there is no scientific consensus on whether eggs are good for you or bad for you!
Last edited by madbadgalaxyman; 24-09-2011 at 08:44 AM.
Reason: coorection
Steven,
Oh my gosh!
That man needs a good shower!
....wanders what the correct answer is
That's not you is it Steven
Because if it is, its a lose - lose situation for me.
If only I was as devilishly handsome............
Anyone familiar with "Time Team" will know the identity of the gentleman.
Quote:
I have to say tho, looks are a very nice bonus, but not necessary. For that man to be taken seriously- he would at least need to have a shower and look somewhat respectable if he's to be a public figure; never mind the hair. He would not be allowed on tv looking like that- there's no where to dab studio make up on. Guys have to wear makeup and look presentable on tv.
Let's just say the dirt is part of his occupational environment.
If he was squeaky clean he wouldn't be doing his job.
Quote:
Lawrence Krauss is a bit hard on my eye (don't tell Shelley), but I still enjoy watching/listening to him.
How about Leonard Susskind, the man who put Stephen Hawking to shame over the information paradox of black holes?
The man who comes across as Mr Average but possesses a brilliant intellect.
Probably doesn't have the eye candy component however....
Quote:
TO EVERYONE: Steven made me talk about Brian against my will.
More likely it would be preventing you talking about Brian.
Interesting discussion, Suzy, about looks vs brains.
Seriously, if a person is going to spend about 18 hours per day doing science, which is probably what it takes to make a contribution at the highest level, she/he is probably going to end up looking pretty awful.
(being a professional scientist is quite "unbalanced" in terms of the contrast between the level of physical activity and the level of mental activity that is engaged in by the scientist)
I once recall meeting a handsome young scientist of athletic appearance, and twenty years later I see that he looks really old...... in fact he has acquired the exact appearance of a wasted old dero in the park!
Sad, really, that prolonged intellectual activity in the absence of exercize and other activities, can have these effects.
cheers, Robert
P.S. If, as I suspect (no proof at all, for now), scientists as a group are not a particularly long lived cohort, this would provide hard evidence for my theory about the physical effects of 24/7/365 science on the human body.
Last edited by madbadgalaxyman; 24-09-2011 at 09:49 AM.
Reason: more info
It is not science that makes you age before your time. It is dealing with idiots and having to constantly reiterate the total history of science to get these idiots up to a semblance of knowledge!
Just re-reading the report and doing some pondering, two things emerge for me:
i) the scientific credibility of the team, seem to not be a real issue .. these guys know what they're doing when compared with anyone not in the business of measuring fundamental particle behaviours;
ii) the fact that Fermilab has already measured faster than light speeds, (even though it was within their margin of error), adds a lot more inferred weight to the possibility that this measurement may be valid.
I'm starting to wonder whether it is a neutrino distribution that they've actually measured?
It seems that the mass of a neutrino is measured indirectly, by measuring the m^2 term and recent measurements somehow produced a negative m^2 term. This would mean that it has an imaginary mass:
i = sqrt(-1), so sqrt(i)^2 < 0
So, this would qualify it as being a tachyon, (as Bojan hinted at, way back).
Tachyons don't violate SR but in theory, they seem to exist courtesy of symmetry. General symmetry in nature is under test at the LHC, and is part of the Higgs hunt, also (not looking too good, either). The symmetry I'm talking about here however, doesn't necessarily have to be related to 'general symmetry in nature', which would decouple this from the LHC tests anyway.
Perhaps these guys have discovered the Tachyon, so it wouldn't be a big surprise that it travels > c ?
Cheers
PS: Don't ask me to describe how something with an imaginary mass would behave in nature .. but it might explain a lot of strange things ? I mean, there are lots of real effects imaginary terms have in electrical fields (eg: power factor) .. so why not an imaginary mass in particle physics having real effects in QM physics ?
.
Here anyway.
