3 ms·

It never made sense to me why they publicized the result, since it looked so clearly like some kind of experimental screw up. All it could do is make them look

It never made sense to me why they publicized the result, since it looked so clearly like some kind of experimental screw up. All it could do is make them look like amateurs when it inevitably came out that they bungled something.

okamiueru 14y ago
I think they were aware of how it looked, as well as the most likely explanation. However, if you have results you cannot explain, you show it to your peers so they can find the error, or confirm the discovery. They never went public and said "we made a discovery". They went public and said "this is what we did, this is what we got".
- fusiongyro 14y ago
  I question their ability to perform science if they have to rely on their peers to find problems in their own equipment. When my car breaks down, I go to a mechanic to have it fixed, but when my software fails, I don't publish it and ask the community to figure out why it doesn't work.
  - ThePherocity 14y ago
    I question your understanding of how science works. Actually, I question your ability to program also. I often go out to the community to find out if there are other issues, or maybe something simple that I forgot. Using your peers for help is not a weakness, it's a strength.
    - fusiongyro 14y ago
      Science is about performing experiments and replicating them, not about debugging hardware. A friend of mine famously complained that his computer was broken because his C programs weren't compiling. He had misspelled "include." The "community" didn't need to step up and help him. He needed to learn how to use his tools.
      - ThePherocity 14y ago
        Well, I wasn't sure before, but you've removed all doubt.
        fusiongyro 14y ago
        You know, I'm not a scientist, so it's quite possible I've misunderstood the situation here. But if nothing else, what I'm saying is exactly what you can expect the average person with some education—albeit not a scientist—to think, based on a casual knowledge of physics (the role of the speed of light, etc.) reading these headlines. I don't think I've been particularly discourteous to you, but if I have, I apologize. It would be more helpful in the future to show me what I haven't seen rather than simply insult me.
  - mtgx 14y ago
    Open Science.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    Programmers do ask the community to find and fix bugs. See, for example, Google offering bounties on Chrome exploits, or the Tarsnap bug bounties. (http://www.tarsnap.com/bugbounty.html http://www.tarsnap.com/bugbounty.html) Are you suggesting these are bad things? The scientists had weird results. They checked everything; they wrote up the results; they released the results cautiously, asking other people to check for errors. They are not to blame for the appalling state of scientific reporting in mainstream media.
zerostar07 14y ago
So in the age of twitter, you scorn a bunch of good physicists for making public their hard earned (but ultimately wrong) and novel experimental data?
- fusiongyro 14y ago
  What does Twitter have to do with double-checking your work?
  - zerostar07 14y ago
    The original paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897) had some 188 authors. I doubt they didn't double-check or 100-check the results. After some point the data just had to be considered believable or worthy of publication. You really think it would be better if they didn't let the world know about it?

okamiueru 14y ago

I think they were aware of how it looked, as well as the most likely explanation. However, if you have results you cannot explain, you show it to your peers so they can find the error, or confirm the discovery. They never went public and said "we made a discovery". They went public and said "this is what we did, this is what we got".

fusiongyro 14y ago
I question their ability to perform science if they have to rely on their peers to find problems in their own equipment. When my car breaks down, I go to a mechanic to have it fixed, but when my software fails, I don't publish it and ask the community to figure out why it doesn't work.
- ThePherocity 14y ago
  I question your understanding of how science works. Actually, I question your ability to program also. I often go out to the community to find out if there are other issues, or maybe something simple that I forgot. Using your peers for help is not a weakness, it's a strength.
  - fusiongyro 14y ago
    Science is about performing experiments and replicating them, not about debugging hardware. A friend of mine famously complained that his computer was broken because his C programs weren't compiling. He had misspelled "include." The "community" didn't need to step up and help him. He needed to learn how to use his tools.
    - ThePherocity 14y ago
      Well, I wasn't sure before, but you've removed all doubt.
      - fusiongyro 14y ago
        You know, I'm not a scientist, so it's quite possible I've misunderstood the situation here. But if nothing else, what I'm saying is exactly what you can expect the average person with some education—albeit not a scientist—to think, based on a casual knowledge of physics (the role of the speed of light, etc.) reading these headlines. I don't think I've been particularly discourteous to you, but if I have, I apologize. It would be more helpful in the future to show me what I haven't seen rather than simply insult me.
- mtgx 14y ago
  Open Science.
- DanBC 14y ago
  Programmers do ask the community to find and fix bugs. See, for example, Google offering bounties on Chrome exploits, or the Tarsnap bug bounties. (http://www.tarsnap.com/bugbounty.html http://www.tarsnap.com/bugbounty.html) Are you suggesting these are bad things? The scientists had weird results. They checked everything; they wrote up the results; they released the results cautiously, asking other people to check for errors. They are not to blame for the appalling state of scientific reporting in mainstream media.

zerostar07 14y ago

So in the age of twitter, you scorn a bunch of good physicists for making public their hard earned (but ultimately wrong) and novel experimental data?

fusiongyro 14y ago
What does Twitter have to do with double-checking your work?
- zerostar07 14y ago
  The original paper (http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897) had some 188 authors. I doubt they didn't double-check or 100-check the results. After some point the data just had to be considered believable or worthy of publication. You really think it would be better if they didn't let the world know about it?