How did the universe come into existence?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Charolotte Caxton wrote:

Eh, maybe the neutrinos were being a bit sluggish that day, or maybe some other cable was loose this time, or maybe enough people weren't believing hard enough. Besides, don't they have to redo it like a hundred times for it to be scientific?

---

101. 100 could come out 50/50.

[ROB34466IIIa]

---

Charolotte Caxton wrote:

Eh, maybe the neutrinos were being a bit sluggish that day, or maybe some other cable was loose this time, or maybe enough people weren't believing hard enough. Besides, don't they have to redo it like a hundred times for it to be scientific?

---

I think this particular experiment will be repeated a few more times and in the long run will show this first one with an unsuspected outcome about which many speculated as the only one with a measuring error.

The list of scientists participating in the link I supplied will cover it' s authenticity afaik.

[ROB34466IIIa]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

ROB34466IIIa wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

I'm a little sad that we missed an "everything you know is wrong" moment.

---

 

Don' t be sad.

 

We' ll meet again .. :robotwink:

---

---

 

 

 

/me rolls his eyes.

"Women ... expectations .."  *sigh* *mumble* :robotindifferent:

[Charolotte Caxton]

---

ROB34466IIIa wrote:

---

Charolotte Caxton wrote:

Eh, maybe the neutrinos were being a bit sluggish that day, or maybe some other cable was loose this time, or maybe enough people weren't believing hard enough. Besides, don't they have to redo it like a hundred times for it to be scientific?

---

I think this particular experiment will be repeated a few more times and in the long run will show this first one with an unsuspected outcome about which many speculated as the only one with a measuring error.

The list of scientists participating in the link I supplied will cover it' s authenticity afaik.

---

Good to know. So, what's left to discover?

[ROB34466IIIa]

The experiments with the neutrino' s have different project names and differ in techniques for measuring. The first was Opera. This (2nd) one is called Icarus.

Oh .. there' s still plenty to discover that' s already been mentioned. After all .. it' s the field of High Energy Physics which I know next to nothing about.

The Higgs Boson for instance.

 

[Charolotte Caxton]

Great! 

[161488303349]

i agree. we learn stuff and so we change for the better. thats a good thing

[Charolotte Caxton]

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Charolotte Caxton wrote:

---

ROB34466IIIa wrote:

---

Charolotte Caxton wrote:

Eh, maybe the neutrinos were being a bit sluggish that day, or maybe some other cable was loose this time, or maybe enough people weren't believing hard enough. Besides, don't they have to redo it like a hundred times for it to be scientific?

---

I think this particular experiment will be repeated a few more times and in the long run will show this first one with an unsuspected outcome about which many speculated as the only one with a measuring error.

The list of scientists participating in the link I supplied will cover it' s authenticity afaik.

---

Good to know. So, what's left to discover?

---

Relative to what we already know? Almost everything.

[Charolotte Caxton]

We, or you? I already know almost everything, the rest I just make up

jk