3 ms·
I’m reminded of the paper, just over 10 years ago, that reporting measuring neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light. When published, the authors ma
by JacobAldridge 3y ago
I’m reminded of the paper, just over 10 years ago, that reporting measuring neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light.
When published, the authors made it clear: this is probably wrong, but we can’t see where we made a mistake … so what if we’re right and just upended relativity theory?
That was turned out to be a measuring error [1]. This one may be the same, though the lead authors publishing two versions of the paper - one with only 3 names, ostensibly because the Nobel Prize can only be awarded to a maximum of 3 people - suggests less modesty and vulnerability on their behalf.
I hope they’re right though!
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.10099 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.10099
- willis936 3y agoI don't see the similarities. This upends zero theories. I see similarities in the long line of "STP superconductors for real this time!" claims, but not findings that contradict current physical models.
- bhaak 3y agoIsn't it that this would upend zero theories because we don't have any that satisfyingly explains superconductivity?
- lIl-IIIl 3y agoI thought of that too, but the difference is that faster than light travel is impossible according to our understanding of physics, but nothing says that room temperature superconductors are impossible.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]