What do you do as a scientist when you know a research result that is almost certainly wrong is about to become a media sensation? That is the quandary I found myself in last month as I awaited the announcement from CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, about particles called neutrinos supposedly traveling faster than the speed of light. I had already been informed about the experiment, whose findings, if true, would require an overhaul of physics: Our current understanding — based on Einstein’s theory of relativity and consistent with every known physical theory and experiment — is that nothing can travel through space faster than the speed of light.
I hoped that somehow the result would escape the attention of the world news media, but I knew better: A news conference had been scheduled. On the other hand — except for the die-hard would-be Einsteins who have already begun to write me suggesting that the CERN result proves their pet theories — I also knew that for the general public the claim would prove to be a momentary curiosity, forgotten along with much of the rest of yesterday’s news.
What is inappropriate, however, is the publicity fanfare coming before the paper has even been examined by referees. Too often today, science is done by news release rather than waiting for refereed publication. Because a significant fraction of experimental results ultimately never get published or are not later confirmed, providing unfiltered results to a largely untutored public is irresponsible.
Fuente: Francisco Capella.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario