I’m not savvy enough to emit further thoughts to the article (other than its highly interesting!) but love to hear what YOU think, Brian? You think they onto a somthing, a revelation into the mysterious dark matter? sounds very exciting.
If the dark matter is non Baryonic, how then can they detect the x-ray and speculate it as dark matter?
Tej as is quoted in article “One explanation could be that they have detected the specific X-ray emission from the decay of the hypothesized “sterile neutrino” — a type of non-baryonic particle that could be a significant dark matter candidate.” There is always speculation that needs to be investigated further. My position at the moment is that I just am not sure. I posted the article to get others opinions/ thoughts etc. I think the problem today is that too much scientific research is publicised without full investigation and peer review.
There is certainly an issue to be looked at.
I dont think its a bad thing to publish uncertain anomaly findings during in-progress investigations of their own findings. This brings the scientific community together to help each other investigate further and derive their own theories, research or findings…be it a mundane false alarm or a great discovery. Remember the neutrino that apparantly travelled faster than light? (why am I asking you that, of course you do) The group bravely published their findings with a heavy emphasis for help on other groups to help verify or point out any errors made. Of course that turned out to be an error in their apparatus. But it was a brave and constructive move for the whole community albeit some will rub dirt in their faces.
As for the sterile neutrino, I get that now and its a stimulating theory that the anomalie x ray reading could be from that. Its great they publish such things even if it turns out to be a false alarm…probably a damn Perseid meteor distorting readings (given its detected from the perseus, lol). It at least stimulates the science community.
I dont think its a bad thing to publish uncertain anomaly findings during in-progress investigations of their own findings. This brings the scientific community together to help each other investigate further and derive their own theories, research or findings…
I understand your point, Tej… but the cynic in me suspects something else. Ultimately, these “announcements” seem to be directed to ensure extra funding. The more sensational the better, as then the press pick up on the story, and the probability of securing extra funding for the research is increased.
Personally, I think this does science a disservice. Sensational claims are made (something travels faster than the speed of light, for example), which generates headline news around the world. Only weeks later, it’s discovered that there is an instrumentation problem. Why couldn’t they wait a little longer before making their sensational announcement to check and double-check their results? From a public perspective, this just looks like scientists are making it up as they go along, bringing the whole of science into disrepute. Everyone gets tarred with the same brush.
I don’t like it.
As regards the latest announcement on a dark matter signal… it’s too early to say. Note the line “its statistical significance is well below the threshold that can be considered to be a “discovery.”“. Oh dear.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Events on July 1, 2017
Events on July 7, 2017
Events on July 9, 2017
Events on July 11, 2017
Events on July 15, 2017
Events on July 16, 2017
Events on July 17, 2017
Events on July 22, 2017
Events on July 23, 2017
Events on July 26, 2017
Events on July 29, 2017
Events on July 30, 2017