The number of kaon to pion and neutrino/antineutrino decays the team observed is higher than the 8.4 per 100 billion predicted by the Standard Model, but it's still within the uncertainty parameters.

So then how the fuck does that hint at new physics? Idiots.

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Whatever particle physicists are, idiots they’re not

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I think that was directed at the journalists coming up with clickbait, not the scientists.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

“One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that, in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.” ― James D. Watson, The Double Helix

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There’s many things in which we shouldn’t take scientists at their word indeed, but in their own field there’s a good chance they have something useful to say

[–] rah@feddit.uk 1 points 10 months ago

in their own field there’s a good chance they have something useful to say

Pity this press release wasn't one of them.

[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They demonstrated the event to five sigma certainty, which is significant, but it's within the uncertainty in the standard model. If they can demonstrate the same or similar things to greater exactness, it could guide research that changes the standard model

[–] rah@feddit.uk -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're just repeating the article. Nothing you said contradicts what I said.

[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh, I thought you were legitimately confused. Not going to spend the energy on a troll

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I thought you were legitimately confused

I'm just curious: if I had been confused, what were you expecting would have happen if you simply repeated what the article had already stated without adding anything?

[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maybe a pleasant discussion starting from common ground, rather than this endless contrarian hell

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 10 months ago

a pleasant discussion

About what?

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's a HINT, not a certainty 😘

[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 10 months ago

It's a HINT

What is?

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The basic procedure at CERN is that in order to be certain about something that's super random is to conduct the experiment trillions of times until you get a couple thousand events and you get to beat down your error. If they startseeing something, it'll still take them a couple of years of data to prove it past their uncertainty requirements.

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 10 months ago

LOL yes I know thanks.