Also, I have to assume that the author has never met a real physicist, or else things like labelling hints of new physics as “scientist nightmares” and “The possibility that physics as we know it might be wrong shocks the people of that field” would never have found their way into the article.

Speaking as a professional physicist, I would recommended changing the phrase “scientist nightmares” to “Things that would make scientists really excited if they could be verified,” and replacing the word “shocks” with “excites” or “intrigues.” That would be much closer to the truth.

I can assure you that nothing packs an auditorium full of physicists like a plausible claim that something really new, fundamental, and unexpected has been verified to exist. I don’t really understand the public impression that physicists are extremely stodgy, conservative, and unwilling to accept new, bizarre ideas. People become physicists because they LIKE bizarre ideas, especially the ones that actually have some evidence backing them up!”[/quote]

there is no “public impression”s about physicists becuase nobody spends their time thinking about physicists. The article is about an interesting error in the realm of space exploration and the possible implications it holds. Not about how physicists are “stodgy, conservative, and unwilling to accept new, bizarre ideas”. Get over yourself. I assure u my impression about physicists hasent changed after reading this interesting article because i still dont care about what physicists are like.

I disagree that these are physicists’ nightmares – I’m pretty sure there are a lot of physicists who would be absolutely delighted with some new, contradictary evidence to dig their teeth into (not to mention the vast number of PhD students with a sudden glut of work to do).

This is my first post here btw, and this site is something I’ve been looking for for a while – fascinating and with a lot of intelligent contributors.

elifint, I agree. Those scientific professionals I have met are anything but stodgy. One in particular took to new ideas like a newly released prisoner at a strip club.

Thanks DI for another great article.

Also, I have to assume that the author has never met a real physicist, or else things like labelling hints of new physics as “scientist nightmares” and “The possibility that physics as we know it might be wrong shocks the people of that field” would never have found their way into the article.

Speaking as a professional physicist, I would recommended changing the phrase “scientist nightmares” to “Things that would make scientists really excited if they could be verified,” and replacing the word “shocks” with “excites” or “intrigues.” That would be much closer to the truth.

I can assure you that nothing packs an auditorium full of physicists like a plausible claim that something really new, fundamental, and unexpected has been verified to exist. I don’t really understand the public impression that physicists are extremely stodgy, conservative, and unwilling to accept new, bizarre ideas. People become physicists because they LIKE bizarre ideas, especially the ones that actually have some evidence backing them up!

Haha, I dont think thats too good man. You have to keep track of bedrock principles such as that.”

It was on the Flintstones?…..I know. Now I am just wasting your time.

Haha, I dont think thats too good man. You have to keep track of bedrock principles such as that.

OK – I will try to read that article. I know this site has really great writers because I can actually figure out what they are talking about.

However, I am voting for the Dark Engergy!! Only because scientists have had their lovely calculations blown apart time and again and they seem to think there is less gravity out there than Dark Energy/Matter. Fun!!

Occam’s Razor. You know I never heard of that term until watching an episode of House, MD?