3 ms·

It shouldn't be career ending unless there's been malfeasance or some kind of sloppy work. The people who go down hard usually have some crime beyond audacity.

It shouldn't be career ending unless there's been malfeasance or some kind of sloppy work. The people who go down hard usually have some crime beyond audacity. It could easily cause some painful embarrassment, but hopefully that would pass with time. Maybe embarrassment similar to that faced by researchers who's results suggested FTL communication, but it turned out to be a bad fiber-optic cable. I didn't follow up but I assume that team is doing OK.

nieve 9y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if they gained a bit of respect. If I recall correctly they did everything right - they had an apparently impossible result, they spent a lot of time trying to disprove it, and when they announced they made it clear that they doubted the result. Hiding it because they were sure it was false, but couldn't disprove would have been poor science. It had to be pretty scary to make that announcement knowing there was almost no chance it wasn't going to turn out to be a problem in their setup and I admire the guts it took to do it. Sometimes the courage of your convictions means trusting the process to get it right when you're sure you're wrong.
- kevinnk 9y ago
  Actually, there was a bunch of blow back and the main researchers behind the result stepped down. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21656-leaders-of-controversial-neutrino-experiment-step-down/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21656-leaders-of-cont...
  - sulam 9y ago
    Reading that, it seems more like they went back to doing research full time instead of being part time administrators -- and probably happier for it.
davesque 9y ago
Agreed. Even in the event of the discovery of work which would qualify as minimally sloppy, I'd think his reputation (if not wanting of some polish) would still be intact after a quick retraction.
- Blaisorblade0 9y ago
  I mostly agree but there is a small effect: "Claims spectacular proofs with flawed arguments" might still be reason to doubt his future proofs more until verified. And mathematicians do use such criterions before reading unverified claimed proofs of hundreds of pages (not uncommon). And since some proofs target tens or hundreds of persons, that can be a problem. I've read such stories, though I don't have a reference at hand.

nieve 9y ago

I wouldn't be surprised if they gained a bit of respect. If I recall correctly they did everything right - they had an apparently impossible result, they spent a lot of time trying to disprove it, and when they announced they made it clear that they doubted the result. Hiding it because they were sure it was false, but couldn't disprove would have been poor science. It had to be pretty scary to make that announcement knowing there was almost no chance it wasn't going to turn out to be a problem in their setup and I admire the guts it took to do it. Sometimes the courage of your convictions means trusting the process to get it right when you're sure you're wrong.

kevinnk 9y ago
Actually, there was a bunch of blow back and the main researchers behind the result stepped down. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21656-leaders-of-controversial-neutrino-experiment-step-down/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21656-leaders-of-cont...
- sulam 9y ago
  Reading that, it seems more like they went back to doing research full time instead of being part time administrators -- and probably happier for it.

davesque 9y ago

Agreed. Even in the event of the discovery of work which would qualify as minimally sloppy, I'd think his reputation (if not wanting of some polish) would still be intact after a quick retraction.

Blaisorblade0 9y ago
I mostly agree but there is a small effect: "Claims spectacular proofs with flawed arguments" might still be reason to doubt his future proofs more until verified. And mathematicians do use such criterions before reading unverified claimed proofs of hundreds of pages (not uncommon). And since some proofs target tens or hundreds of persons, that can be a problem. I've read such stories, though I don't have a reference at hand.