3 ms·
Look, that may be so, but if it is, then they should either omit such a line entirely so as not to mislead their readers, select better language so that we don'
by DavidSJ 6y ago
Look, that may be so, but if it is, then they should either omit such a line entirely so as not to mislead their readers, select better language so that we don't collapse concepts which are fundamentally, completely, different from each other, or they could try to educate the public on a distinction which is fundamental to science.
I mean, we might as well say that the BBC should just use the words "million" and "billion" interchangeably because most readers have no sense of scale.
Bottom line: thanks to this line, the reader is likely to think that new physics has very likely been discovered, when the opposite is the case.
- simiones 6y agoI don't agree. The whole paragraph makes that clear - 1 in 1000 is actually pretty good odds that this is just a coincidence, and most people should know this intuitively. > The measurement from LHCb is three-sigma - meaning there is roughly a one in 1,000 chance that the measurement is a statistical coincidence. So people should not get carried away by these findings, according to team leader Prof Chris Parkes, from the University of Manchester.