Best as we can tell, it wasn’t a hoax. It was a poorly understood experiment (and perhaps premature arxiv preprint). It’s very similar to the “faster than spee

Best as we can tell, it wasn’t a hoax. It was a poorly understood experiment (and perhaps premature arxiv preprint). It’s very similar to the “faster than speed of light” puzzle from a few years back. It doesn’t harm scientific integrity. It reveals that science is by nature an exploratory process where what we know today is subject to change in light of new data and theory. As a PhD physics scientist with a familiarity with this area, I’m glad this got the attention it did and showed science working “as it should”.