Neutrino 'faster than light' scientist resigns

[hue]

Source: BBC News

The head of an experiment that appeared to show subatomic particles travelling faster than the speed of light has resigned from his post.

Prof Antonio Ereditato oversaw results that appeared to challenge Einstein's theory that nothing could travel faster than the speed of light.

Reports said some members of his group, called Opera, had wanted him to resign.

Earlier in March, a repeat experiment found that the particles, known as neutrinos, did not exceed light speed.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17560379

[Orrex]

1. I read about this next week.

Two weeks ago.

[Botany]

2. It is all relative

[jtuck004]

3. That's gonna go right through most people.... n/t

[JackRiddler]

29. That would not be a good fly-by for us.

What's it supposed to depict?

[FLPanhandle]

36. It's a visualization of a test performed showing starlight was effected by the gravity of the sun

A key concept in Einsteins theory.

[Fearless]

42. +1

[SamG]

4. A few days ago, (or was it next week?)

we knew that the original data was flawed in the previous experiments.

The guy is gone, (or will be in the future, not sure which).

[SamG]

5. Did you say, (or will you say) that he

resigned, or will resign?

Sorry, I'm just having a glass of wine, so bear with me.

[Typical NYC Lib]

43. No

But I'll beer with you lol!

[Bosso 63]

6. Bankers destroy the economy and they get promotions.

Go figure.

[hamerfan]

7. Thanks for this update!

Or have I thanked you already? Hmmmm....
On a related note, as I don't spend any time with science any more:
Have they ever figured out if neutrinos have mass? Back in the 1980s, yeah I'm an old fart, this was to be the determination if we have an open or closed universe.
School me, please.
On edit:
Do we know yet if tachyons travel faster than light?

[boppers]

20. In short:

1. It's no longer a question of whether or not things have mass, it's how much. Photons have a boundary of how *much* mass they have, and it's very tiny, so we keep trying to find better ways of measuring mass.

2. No, tachyons do not travel faster than light. Nothing does.... Except particles that cease existing in one place, and then exist in another, but they're not really travelling. It's more like teleportation.

Shit got really weird since the 80's, but hey, the 80's seemed weird compared to the 70's, and so on.

[rayofreason]

30. Neutrinos have mass.

We have known that since 1998 from the data indicating flavor oscillation in solar neutrinos.

http://wwwphy.princeton.edu/borexino/nu-mass.html

more here with heavier physics

http://www.fynu.ucl.ac.be/librairie/theses/gustaaf.brooijmans/node9.html

[renate]

8. that doesn't seem quite fair

I thought at the time the (wrong) results were released, the scientists involved were as cautious as anybody else, and encouraged people to try to duplicate the results because they didn't wholly believe them themselves.

This makes me sad. Science involves making honest mistakes sometimes--emphasis on the "honest," which is how this seemed to me.

[fujiyama]

9. I agree, unless he was trying to make it some sort of big media story (you know those scientists are

real publicity hounds) or he was fudging or manipulating data, I think being forced to resign for overlooking some results (which in this case strikes me as an honest mistake) seems a bit much.

[FiveGoodMen]

11. Agreed.

[Pale Blue Dot]

13. Agreed +1000

This is exactly how science is supposed to work. A scientist should only have to resign if he or she refuses to admit their conclusions were wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence.

[Posteritatis]

14. Might be a way to appease funding sources

Lots of government types aren't going to know the first thing about any of this past what they read in often-quite-terrible science reporting; some senator or committee chairman or equivalent could easily have a hard time getting past "this guy was wrong and therefore incompetent." Something like that could pressure someone out quickly enough.

And a lot of academics know how quickly things can unravel when something innocuous gets blown out of proportion in the news; enough people only survive one encounter with the press in that sense that getting out while the getting's good is often a good idea. Anyone with that kind of position isn't going to have a problem landing something elsewhere, of course, and a new person at the helm might result in the group getting some breathing space.

It sucks, yeah, but the PR court has already crucified the guy in his current role.

[slampoet]

18. He dared to be wrong and is to be admired, a little, for that.

I'd still hire him if i could.

[Ter]

10. I smell a conspiracy

God forbid mainstream science be wrong. It's all a cover-up, just like the're now trying to say the repeat experiment didn't exceed it. BS.

[Posteritatis]

12. I'm guessing the entire physics community has a better grasp of this than you do. (nt)

[Pale Blue Dot]

15. Why would that be the case?

Just because of all of their years in university learning about physics followed by years of practical experience?

Well, I skimmed A Brief History of Time and I smell conspiracy!

[Ter]

19. I'm guessing you put all your trust in NASA too

n/t

[rayofreason]

33. Don't tell me...

...you are one of these "We never went to the Moon" types.

[snooper2]

39. We need more "DefendandProtects" around here

LOL, keeps it interesting...

See, just check out this thread Ter made for us

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1135620

[Gore1FL]

17. They know why it failed. The explanation makes sense. This wouldn't prove relativity wrong. n/t

[FLPanhandle]

22. There is no such thing as "mainstream science", there is only science and non-scientific woo

You state it's all a cover-up. Based on what evidence? Oh never mind, I know you don't have any just your emotions and what you want to be true.

[rayofreason]

34. If something is wrong...

....or more likely incomplete (Newton was not wrong, just incomplete), then every physicists wet dream is to find it and win a Nobel prize.

Cover-up? Only in the mind of someone who does not understand how science works.

[LanternWaste]

37. After this therefore because of this...?

Concluding that a cover-up happened based on one individual being fired is, by its very nature, the logical fallacy, post-hoc-ergo-prompter-hoc (after this, therefore because of this). Which seems to me, to be a very unscientific methodology itself...

However, I would certainly entertain any relevant evidence that you may have inaverdently left out which does indeed, support your conclusion.

[Odin2005]

16. Forced to resign because of bad data? That's stupid.

It's not like he did it on purpose.

[boppers]

21. It was a faulty cable.

It wasn't the bad data, it was the huge stink, and press releases, and media appearances, over a bad cable.

[Lucky Luciano]

24. For things like that, best to show absolute competence.

[FarCenter]

23. It is unclear what "head of the experiment" meant

I am currently Spokesperson of the OPERA experiment at LNGS.

That is how he describes his role on his homepage at the University of Bern.

http://www.lhep.unibe.ch/index.php?id=86&uid=4

[rayofreason]

32. "Spokesperson" of an experiment...

...is a big deal in high-energy or nuclear physics. They work in big collaborations with clear hierarchies.

Stepping down in this case is like falling on your sword. He will still have a job, etc., he just won't be setting the agenda for the OPERA experiment anymore.

[CanSocDem]

25. Re-Defining Physics...

...would be too stressful on corporate science. They are already staggering back from the repeated blows of a citizenry rising up and insisting that things are not as they appear.

.

[Odin2005]

26. LOL, WUT?

[Posteritatis]

28. Because CERN's totally corporate science, and the citizenry totally cares about it. (nt)

[rayofreason]

31. "things are not as they appear"...

...particularly when one has no clue.

"repeated blows of a citizenry rising up"?????????

Yep. Clueless.

[jimlup]

27. Yeah well we've all been expecting this one to implode...

[jberryhill]

35. He admitted to breaking a law

...so whether he actually did is beside the point.

[RedCloud]

38. A million years from now we can all laugh at how absurd this light fetish was.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

40. yes, there are many things we don't know

it is difficult to reproduce what is actually occurring. We can predict, have models etc. but there is still a lot we don't know and what we perceive. We'll look back on this in 30 years ( I won't be here) and laugh probably?

I wouldn't rely on GPS/satellites for this experiment (orbital motion and relativity?)

[Ikonoklast]

41. I was laughing at it yesterday, right around sunset.

"WHO'S YOUR GOD NOW, EINSTEIN?"