> photons have properties x, y, z, so maybe they can travel at .5c, let me look into it. No, the claim about what is possible for a photon was much stronger. I

> photons have properties x, y, z, so maybe they can travel at .5c, let me look into it. No, the claim about what is possible for a photon was much stronger. I am asserting now that photons can travel at .5c, full stop. I will not look into it, as I have already determined it is possible. I am not making a hypothesis about the universe, I am making a claim about how I believe it to actually work. Anyway, that is an aside. I still think this just comes down to semantics about what is a claim about the world and what is a statement about uncertainty. I interpret them saying something is possible as them making a statement about their own partial knowledge. I specifically do not interpret it as a claim about the world. I do interpret it as a claim about their own research and their own partial knowledge. Their research does not demonstrate an impossibility. That is the claim they present. I still believe you are making a semantic interpretation of the word "possibility" that is different from the intent of the researchers. I think you are interpreting a stronger claim than the researchers are making. Here is, for example, the same qualification as reported in a different article: > Although, in this study, the researchers found that commercial cognitive training alone would not have an influence on one's decision-making process or cognitive abilities, they believe that it was still an avenue worthy of rigorous investigation. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170710135410.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170710135410.h...