4 ms·
Scientists generally do not keep data secret. They try to publish as much as they can actually! This is how you get nice things like funding and tenure! Most
by beloch 15y ago
Scientists generally do not keep data secret. They try to publish as much as they can actually! This is how you get nice things like funding and tenure!
Most of the time reporters misunderstand the research and then oversell it in order to get their story read. The general public is usually left scratching their heads because of this bizarre layer of clueless journalists between them and the scientists. Yes, some scientists are hard to understand, but there's no hope in trying to understand particle physics filtered through the soft spongy grey matter of a liberal arts major! Scientists are quite often educators who are used to speaking to a wide range of audiences. Journalists would do far far better to introduce the subject and then let the scientist explain it in their own words. I have no idea why this is not done more.
As for the FTL neutrinos at CERN... I'd hold on to skepticism for now. The reason they're asking for help finding the glitch instead of proudly proclaiming that they've found tachyons (FTL particles) is because this would be a truly bizarre result that would upend a century of physics that has, to date, proved remarkably accurate in its predictions. If this discovery proved true it would literally force us to rewrite physics from ~1900 onwards. Physicists are not afraid of this. Quite the contrary! It would touch off a bonanza of research! There would be so much work to do that the field would literally explode. It's just a lot more probable that there really is a glitch somewhere and we simply haven't found it yet.
This actually would not be the first time that tachyons were "found". A group in the 70's found statistically significant evidence for them preceding cosmic showers. They were so sure of their results that they published. Then, a year or two later, they discovered that it was just a glitch in their electronics! These guys were small fry compared to CERN, but CERN's accelerator is so complex that glitches could be very hard to find. The scientists at CERN are clearly out of ideas and mean just what they say: They don't believe their results and they want help finding the glitch that's probably causing them. It's extremely irresponsible to report this story as if FTL particles have really been found before CERN has had a chance to consult with outside scientists and other facilities have had a chance to try reproducing their results.
- trocker 15y agoYes,the mankind would literally need to rewrite physics! It will be so exciting to be a part of it! About the 70's group, can you share the link to the article?
- beloch 15y agohttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v248/n5443/abs/248028a0.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v248/n5443/abs/248028a0... I forget the source, but they later tested their setup with random input and found it predicted tachyons from that as well.
- azulum 15y agoam i the only one that has come to love the scientific method simply because it creates more questions than it answers. there is just so much that we do not and cannot understand. the more we learn, the less we know. fantastic. on the flipside, i would be certain that certainty is a particular kind of hell, if having such knowledge didn't condemn me to it. excuse me while i proceed to consume my tail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros
- samstave 15y agoThe Scientific Method could be boiled down to: 10: Question Reality 20: Verify Results 30: GOTO 10
- amorphid 15y agoLine numbers. Awww yeah!
- InclinedPlane 15y ago10: Question (the currently accepted model of) Reality 20: Verify Results 30: GOTO 10
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Radim 15y agolet's try without GOTO: while anyone_cares: improve_model() if theory_of_everything_appears or strong_ai_appears: raise Exception("rethink loop")
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- gmac 15y agoScientists generally do not keep data secret. They try to publish as much as they can actually! Publish != tell the media. Publish != share raw data.
- beloch 15y agoWhen we publish papers, we usually include sample raw data as part of an online supplement or appendix whenever the journal permits it (most people never look at these). Not all journals do permit this, and storage constraints sometimes make it difficult to provide a worthwhile sample anyways. We do supply raw data to anyone who asks for it. If that counts as keeping our data secret, then so be it. I have yet to find encounter a group in my field that refused to share raw data when asked for it. They're usually happy to have another set of eyes look for a meaning they didn't publish (This could lead to another paper they might not have to work very hard for!). Again, is it really secret if all you have to do is ask for it? Corresponding author email addresses are on papers for a reason! I will say that it is unusual for a group of scientists as prominent as the ones at CERN are to go to the media before publishing, but they are clearly very unsure of their results and would rather have a lot of eyes looking for bugs before they commit to publishing their results. This, of course, won't accomplish much if they try to keep secrets, as you are suggesting. In fact, here's a challenge for you. Go ask CERN for their FTL neutrino data. I bet they'll be happy to give you a copy. They'll probably even have a grad-student to spare to explain some of it to you, although his or her time will probably be at a premium for the next few weeks!
- gmac 15y agoThat's a fair point, and my comment was a bit lazy. All I wanted to say was that publishing findings, publicising findings, and sharing the raw data aren't exactly the same thing and don't necessarily go together.