• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Big Bang Ripples Discovery May Be Big Bust?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kimawolf

Member
Has the recent discovery of gravitational waves been reduced to dust? Not so fast.

The news that ripples in space-time, called gravitational waves, had been spotted stunned the physics community earlier this year. This week, rumours began swirling that the scientists who reported the find have now admitted to making a mistake. The team missed a key detail in its analysis of galactic dust, the rumours suggest, making it more likely that the signal came from a source other than gravitational waves.

But the team's response to this claim is unequivocal: "We've done no such thing," says principal investigator John Kovac at Harvard University. The validity of the discovery won't be known until another group either supports or opposes their finding, which could happen later this year.

In March, the BICEP2 collaboration announced that it had seen an imprint on ancient cosmic light that it says was created by gravitational waves. Those waves are thought to be products of inflation, a period of rapid growth during the first sliver of a second after the big bang. The finding was hailed as a smoking gun for the theory of inflation – and as evidence that theories of a multiverse may be true.

Almost as soon as the buzz surrounding the discovery died down, doubts began cropping up. BICEP2's signal was based on the alignment – or polarisation – of the first light emitted in the universe, a mere 380,000 years after the big bang. But other things could mimic the signal created by this light, such as the ashes of exploding stars or dust in our own galaxy.

The BICEP2 team strongly ruled out some of these alternative explanations, but there are others it can't rule out yet. The first possible tiebreaker is expected to come from the European Space Agency's Planck satellite, which is set to release its own polarisation maps of the entire sky in October.

On 12 May, however, a rumour emerged on the physics blog Résonaances that the BICEP2 team has already admitted defeat. The blogger, particle physicist Adam Falkowski at CERN, says he has heard through the scientific grapevine that the BICEP2 collaboration misinterpreted a preliminary Planck map in its analysis. That map, presented at a conference, showed many possible sources of polarised light. The team reportedly used the map assuming that it only charted dust.

"The rumour is that the BICEP team has now admitted to the mistake," wrote Falkowski.

More at link: http://www.newscientist.com/article...over-credibility-of-big-bang-ripple-find.html

So is this a case of angry scientist who wished he made one the biggest discoveries in our lifetimes, or the case of overly zealous scientists announcing something too soon without proper verification? But at the same time I am not sure who to believe, I mean unlike video game rumors, these guys are all scientists, so I'd think they all have some credibility in this matter.

Also I’m not sure on the rules for posting “rumors” like this outside of the videogame forum, so a mod if you think it’s not worthy of a thread please lock it.
 

komplanen

Member
I mean unlike video game rumors, these guys are all scientists, so I'd think they all have some credibility in this matter.

Scientists are just as human as any of us with emotions like pride, greed and jealousy affecting their work. This has been well documented throughout the history and is why it's better to wait for peer review and validation before taking a scientific paper for the Truth. Most often it seems journalists write articles with sensationalist headlines that confuse the general populace when things change "all the time". When in fact it's usually the discovering scientists themselves who would want to wait for the peer review progress to run its course.

Wasn't it only a couple of years ago when CERN scientists thought they found a particle that travels faster than the speed of light only to soon discover it was a faulty cable that caused the erroneous readings. I doubt any of the scientists related to that discovery jumped out of their seats and ran to the closest tabloid paper to tell their story :)
 

Kimawolf

Member
Scientists are just as human as any of us with emotions like pride, greed and jealousy affecting their work. This has been well documented throughout the history and is why it's better to wait for peer review and validation before taking a scientific paper for the Truth. Most often it seems journalists write articles with sensationalist headlines that confuse the general populace when things change "all the time". When in fact it's usually the discovering scientists themselves who would want to wait for the peer review progress to run its course.

Wasn't it only a couple of years ago when CERN scientists thought they found a particle that travels faster than the speed of light only to soon discover it was a faulty cable that caused the erroneous readings. I doubt any of the scientists related to that discovery jumped out of their seats and ran to the closest tabloid paper to tell their story :)
Yes very true. Lots of headlines saying" Einstein's theory proven wrong". I guess we can just wait to see now.
 

Dryk

Member
It's usually the latter. We scientists are like the creators of fan games, we can't help but rush out and tell everyone we can when something good happens.
 

Yrael

Member
Yes very true. Lots of headlines saying" Einstein's theory proven wrong". I guess we can just wait to see now.

tumblr_kr9p3wRJKH1qzlo36o1_500.gif


Unfortunately the media cycle and its thirst for sensational headlines doesn't always gel well with the slow, careful and thorough process of scientific discovery. The original team at OPERA themselves appealed to the physics community for further analysis and interpretation, being skeptical and cautious of their own astounding result of FTL neutrinos.
 

nel e nel

Member
Scientists are just as human as any of us with emotions like pride, greed and jealousy affecting their work. This has been well documented throughout the history and is why it's better to wait for peer review and validation before taking a scientific paper for the Truth. Most often it seems journalists write articles with sensationalist headlines that confuse the general populace when things change "all the time". When in fact it's usually the discovering scientists themselves who would want to wait for the peer review progress to run its course.

Wasn't it only a couple of years ago when CERN scientists thought they found a particle that travels faster than the speed of light only to soon discover it was a faulty cable that caused the erroneous readings. I doubt any of the scientists related to that discovery jumped out of their seats and ran to the closest tabloid paper to tell their story :)

Yep. Throw in the one-two punch of competition for grant funding, and cutbacks in federal funding of those grants and, well...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom