Hi James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected]
>>> <[email protected]> 15-Oct-11 10:10:45 AM >>> On 15 Oct 2011 at 9:47, Mike Palij wrote: > Well, you can forget about them if re-analyses are correct. > Here is one source that explains away the faster than light finding in > terms of relativity and different frames of reference -- it is for a > general audience: > http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/speedy-neutrino.php Um, not so fast, relativity-breath. That headline which claims "Speedy neutrino mystery likely solved, relativity safe after all" is a tad too quick (and by more than 60 ns) to reassure us. A more cautious (and preferable) headline is this one, "Faster-than-Light Neutrino Puzzle Claimed Solved by Special Relativity". With emphasis on "claimed". According to this readable article from MIT, at http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27260/ , there are now more than 80 papers which have attempted to debunk or explain the phenonomenon. This is just one more, even if a worthy one. The article goes on to observe, JC: I'm not sure I see a huge difference between "likely solved" in the original headline and "claimed solved" in the second. Moreover, technically, shouldn't "mystery" and "puzzle" in both headlines have some similar qualifier ("possible mystery" "likely puzzle" "potential puzzle" ...) since there would appear to be strong reason (relativity theory and its empirical base) to have some reservations about the reported finding? I wonder if this situation in physics is analogous to the Bem controversy in psychology? We have some highly unlkely finding and numerous (80 papers already according to the article Stephen cites) efforts to debunk it. What should our current position be? To accept as valid until disproven the finding or to be skeptical about it until it withstands all the criticism? Tough choice, perhaps especially once we get outside our areas of expertise. From Campbell's evolutionary epistemology perspective, "peer review" is NOT the end of the process ... there will be a long period of reflection and criticism through which the published results must pass before they should be accepted into the mainstream. Take care Jim --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=13450 or send a blank email to leave-13450-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
