The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if you said let's treat this like the physicists treat their science we can go through and we can come up with so many possible alternative explanations that there's a very high likelihood that what you see claiming is a discovery is a false positive
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
maybe in this case the muon comes off and it gets lodged in the infinitesimal you know dividing line between the two detectors and you don't see it maybe uh a neutrino comes off on this one and it bounces off the side of the towel detector and you don't see it maybe any and by the time he's done and the chapter in the book was called the altarelli cocktail and you come up with all these different ways one of this one of that one of these are all the unknown unknowns you can now imagine them because every the around the world physicists have spent months trying to and it's clear that if you begin to understand the background and all the unknown unknowns you could explain everything ruby and company has seen