Support NeoGAF

[DiscoJer]

(

Really?

I'd like for the Steady State theory to be right all along. It's probably not, but until there is conclusive proof, I'm holding out hope...it's much less depressing.

 

[sphinx]

maybe a mod should put a "[Up: Debunked]" part on the topic line

 

[mario_O]

So it was the synchrotron radiation generated by electrons moving around galactic magnetic fields within our own Galaxy. That sucks.

 

[teh_J0kerer]

party's over, the analysis was flawed.

http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346


back to the drawing board

I work in this field, and that article is not a fair description of the situation.

First of all, the author is Paul Steinhardt who is probably the cosmologist who dislikes the theory of inflation more than anyone else in the field. That doesn't mean he is wrong, but you should understand that his general view of the theory is very uncommon, and so he is coming at this from a biased point of view.

The situation with the BICEP 2 detection is currently not clear: it is far too early to claim that their result is wrong. The basic issue is this: They definitely seem to have detected a polarization signal in the cosmic microwave background. The question is whether it was caused by gravitational waves from inflation... or perhaps light scattering off of dust in the galaxy. BICEP 2 used several different arguments to claim that the dust explanation could not be true. It now appears that *one* of those arguments may have been wrong (admittedly, it was the strongest of the various arguments). That does *not* mean that their basic result or interpretation was wrong.. it just means there is more doubt than before.

We still have to wait for the situation to be clarified.

 

[OminoMichelin]

I work in this field, and that article is not a fair description of the situation.

First of all, the author is Paul Steinhardt who is probably the cosmologist who dislikes the theory of inflation more than anyone else in the field. That doesn't mean he is wrong, but you should understand that his general view of the theory is very uncommon, and so he is coming at this from a biased point of view.

The situation with the BICEP 2 detection is currently not clear: it is far too early to claim that their result is wrong. The basic issue is this: They definitely seem to have detected a polarization signal in the cosmic microwave background. The question is whether it was caused by gravitational waves from inflation... or perhaps light scattering off of dust in the galaxy. BICEP 2 used several different arguments to claim that the dust explanation could not be true. It now appears that *one* of those arguments may have been wrong (admittedly, it was the strongest of the various arguments). That does *not* mean that their basic result or interpretation was wrong.. it just means there is more doubt than before.

We still have to wait for the situation to be clarified.

Thank you for the explanation. I remember how the scientists said that they spend a very long time verifying thing, so such a mistake strikes as weird.

 

[Naked Snake]

Really?

Yes, because this finding was so exciting and opened the potential for many more discoveries.

maybe a mod should put a "[Up: Debunked]" part on the topic line

I wouldn't call it debunked just yet. I'd wait for more analysis and testing.

I work in this field, and that article is not a fair description of the situation.

First of all, the author is Paul Steinhardt who is probably the cosmologist who dislikes the theory of inflation more than anyone else in the field. That doesn't mean he is wrong, but you should understand that his general view of the theory is very uncommon, and so he is coming at this from a biased point of view.

The situation with the BICEP 2 detection is currently not clear: it is far too early to claim that their result is wrong. The basic issue is this: They definitely seem to have detected a polarization signal in the cosmic microwave background. The question is whether it was caused by gravitational waves from inflation... or perhaps light scattering off of dust in the galaxy. BICEP 2 used several different arguments to claim that the dust explanation could not be true. It now appears that *one* of those arguments may have been wrong (admittedly, it was the strongest of the various arguments). That does *not* mean that their basic result or interpretation was wrong.. it just means there is more doubt than before.

We still have to wait for the situation to be clarified.

Basically this.

 

[ElFly]

Bump

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=7503

The Planck collaboration has an inimitable way of releasing important new results, they like to do it in French (see here for instance). Tonight a French Planck website contains the long-awaited news of the results from the BICEP2/Keck/Planck collaboration to reanalyze the BICEP2 data on polarized B-modes, in a way that allows proper estimation of the contribution of dust. The bottom line is that the BICEP2 claims of seeing a primordial r=.16-.20 that got a huge amount of media attention last year have been shot down. The new analysis says that r is less than .13. I don’t see a paper yet, rumor is that the paper will be on the arXiv Monday night.

http://public.planck.fr/resultats/253-la-reponse-de-bicep2-keck-planck

 

[User 73706]

party's over, the analysis was flawed.

http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346



back to the drawing board

jebus: 1
m'laytheists: 0