dfreybur
Premium Member
Finding evidence that contradicts the current theories is what every scientist hopes to find. Why do you think people we so excited about the faster than light neutrino speeds out of Italy a few years ago (it was a error in the experiment in the end)? When we find something that contradicts the current theories the first thing to do is make sure the new information is legitamate. That means that the evidence actually contradicts something already well supported and that the conclusions being drawn from it are accurate, that the data wasn't fabricated or manipulated in some way.
Tachyon neutrinos might not have been all that shocking. Tachyons violation Einstein's general relativity but there are multiple competitors for GR. In special relativity a particle can't be accelerated past C but there's nothing to say it can't be created already past C. There are many cases were particles are created by a collision between two very high energy photons so C is already in play. In this sense it would be a puzzle similar to matter versus anti-matter - Why is there so much more matter than anti-matter in the universe? The particle version would become - Why are there so many more sub-C particles generated than tachyons?
Confirming the observation would have overthrown Einstein's GR in favor of others.
There's a joke among scientists -
A - The data didn't come out according to theory. It's frustrating.
B - There's theory and there's the universe. I betting on the universe not on the theory. Which one are you betting on?
Doug's joke corollary -
D - Given Einstein's track record I don't see a ton of down side betting on his version of GR over the competing ones. So far the universe seems to be on Einstein's side for anything not quantum. That's not even counting the fact that his Nobel Prize was in quantum mechanics ...