Statistical fluke or scientific evidence?
Definitely a blob.
Another earth-shattering discovery is on the horizon. Evidence was found for a new fundamental particle! The times we live in!
Coming from an astronomy background, I should have known better than to click on the link, but click and read I did. I’ve always had a weak spot for revolutionary cosmological and particle physics theories. Revolutionary theories of any kind, come to think of it.
I’m not sure whether the evidence is yet as solid as the inviting title suggests. “[…] a few hundred more electron neutrinos than expected” sounds to me like “please extend our funding, we promise we’ll find more”. Nevertheless, it is an exciting possibility and I hope they’ll get to continue their experiments, perhaps on a slightly larger scale so that we won’t have to wait another 15 years for another few hundred events.
Physics aside, one quote that caught my attention was the following:
“I am not ready to bet my money yet because the excess is kind of a blob on a plot”, Conrad said. “What if something else can make a blob? To be really convinced, I want to see, with high significance, this predicted wiggle.”
This is exactly the kind of language that astronomers use when discussing latest results. Astronomy and particle physics seem pretty similar then, staring at fuzzy blobs and bumps and making something out of it. Also, in both cases, these are blobs, bumps and wiggles that took at least a year of modeling and data reduction to produce. And the best bumps are those that have not been explained before.
Looks like nebulas to me.
The innocent bystander may wonder whether professional scientists talking in such childish terms can be taken seriously at all. The fact that a senior writer in a popular science publication did not edit out the blobs and wiggles may already tell you that you should take it seriously.
In fact, this kind of language can tell you whether some discovery is really new. In a year or so, after a first paper has been published and some conference talks have been given, the blob or wiggle may have been officially upgraded to an “excess” (already seen in the above quote), a “shapoid”, a “cloud”, a “cluster” or some other nebulous but more official sounding term.
Our little baby blob has then reached its toddler phase. It will start walking and talking a little. But it has a long way to go towards adulthood. And, sadly, infant mortality rates among blobs are pretty high.
Perhaps, though, it will some day be explained by something other than a statistical fluke or some existing theory (the main causes of blob mortality). Maybe, then, it will get a real name. A “phenomenon” or even a bonafide “theory”, together with the surname of its discoverer or explainer. One can hope.
When do you think we should take blobs, bumps, clouds and clusters seriously? Leave your thoughts in the comments!
From https://www.exploratorium.edu/blogs/spectrum/blob-might-ruin-christmas. Oceanographers have learned to make use of the full terrifying potential of the term.
