3 ms·

It's usually best to leave off the "look guys, I broke physics" until human error has been well and thoroughly ruled out.

by glimcat 15y ago

rubidium 15y ago
Sure, I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise. However, the OPERA collaboration has done a heroic job checking everything they could think of. Thus the continued interest. Physics, as I'm sure you know, has undergone many revolutions in its understanding of the world. This could be the start of a new one, or it could fizzle and be a quirky measurement error. In either case, highly worth following to see what happens.
- glimcat 15y ago
  If it's not a bit of partially-digested cheese, it might have to do with the interface between relativity and QED. But while it's not unthinkable that relativity requires revision under some circumstances, it's one of the most thoroughly and repeatedly proven tenets of modern physics. It's going to require something much more definitive and reproducible to overturn that mountain. I wouldn't expect a positive answer to this inside ten years, but a negative answer could turn up any time since it depends on someone finds the bug in the gears.
  - lwat 15y ago
    If another lab using different equipment were to reproduce this result, that would give a positive result in less then 10 years?
    - glimcat 15y ago
      That's one of the big steps which is necessary. It still leaves the questions of (a) funding, (b) how do you reproduce it and how long does that take, and (c) how do you explain it. Many problems in science are considered to be "twenty year problems," by which we mean that they'll probably be solved eventually, but that it's unlikely to be any time soon. Many such problems go on for much longer without a solution despite significant progress (see also: fusion power plants). This isn't quite on that scope - but it could evolve into one if it actually ends up with a result which can be reproduced on command.
      - Anderkent 15y ago
        MINOS is already working on reproducing it (see article), and if they succeed it will be strong evidence that we're looking at something new.

It's usually best to leave off the "look guys, I broke physics" until human error has been well and thoroughly ruled out.

by glimcat 15y ago

It's usually best to leave off the "look guys, I broke physics" until human error has been well and thoroughly ruled out.

rubidium 15y ago

Sure, I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise. However, the OPERA collaboration has done a heroic job checking everything they could think of. Thus the continued interest. Physics, as I'm sure you know, has undergone many revolutions in its understanding of the world. This could be the start of a new one, or it could fizzle and be a quirky measurement error. In either case, highly worth following to see what happens.

glimcat 15y ago
If it's not a bit of partially-digested cheese, it might have to do with the interface between relativity and QED. But while it's not unthinkable that relativity requires revision under some circumstances, it's one of the most thoroughly and repeatedly proven tenets of modern physics. It's going to require something much more definitive and reproducible to overturn that mountain. I wouldn't expect a positive answer to this inside ten years, but a negative answer could turn up any time since it depends on someone finds the bug in the gears.
- lwat 15y ago
  If another lab using different equipment were to reproduce this result, that would give a positive result in less then 10 years?
  - glimcat 15y ago
    That's one of the big steps which is necessary. It still leaves the questions of (a) funding, (b) how do you reproduce it and how long does that take, and (c) how do you explain it. Many problems in science are considered to be "twenty year problems," by which we mean that they'll probably be solved eventually, but that it's unlikely to be any time soon. Many such problems go on for much longer without a solution despite significant progress (see also: fusion power plants). This isn't quite on that scope - but it could evolve into one if it actually ends up with a result which can be reproduced on command.
    - Anderkent 15y ago
      MINOS is already working on reproducing it (see article), and if they succeed it will be strong evidence that we're looking at something new.