Comments on: PAMELA Results Mean Only One Thing: Please Trust the Scientific Process

By: Huygens

Huygens — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:04:43 +0000

Scientists have to be careful how they say things.

This is how all the nonsense about the LHC got started, because an honest yet nieve scientists said there was a very small chance that something could go wrong with the giant particle accelerator.

What he failed to add was that the odds were practically zero, but the undereducated press took his words literally and went to town. In the process they panicked an even less informed public.

By: jerry

jerry — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:00:49 +0000

It proves something else: There are many out there who can't wait to leap onto the dark matter bandwagon. High energy sources in the bodies of galaxies that 'require new physics' are an exciting observation. The first explanation out-of-the-block is not always the best scientific answer.

By: pfon71361

pfon71361 — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 07:53:43 +0000

Mr. Alexander has a very valid point. Once the genie is out of the bottle you can't put him back in again, so to speak. As long as other scientists acknowledge the PAMELA team's work as one source of their speculations on Dark Matter existence then I think they really aren't "stealing" anything.

By: triskeln

triskeln — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:39:41 +0000

Hello, and thanks for the article, Nancy;

I enjoy reading you articles and the articles on UniverseToday.

However, could you please forward my request that this site be made more MOBILE friendly, or to create a separate MOBILE site?

Thanks again for your good work.

By: Astrofiend

Astrofiend — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:08:48 +0000

Agreed Don. Although I think it unfortunate that they feel they now have to prematurely release their data, they should not have presented results if they did not want them in the public domain. By definition, presenting results at a conference is releasing them to other scientists for their consideration.

Accordingly, if these results are related to the work of other scientists present at the conference, then I think they are more than welcome to discuss them, so long as they add the disclaimer that the results in question have not yet been vetted to the full satisfaction of the PAMELA scientists.

By: Don Alexander

Don Alexander — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:34:16 +0000

Well, as a scientist myself, I guess I can consider myself pseudo-informed…

I think it's an ethically gray area. In essence, no one actually stole the PAMELA results. The PAMELA team was the first to present their data at a conference. The two other papers just state "Assume PAMELA IS seeing a dark matter excess with these values, what does that mean?"No one actually published results, claiming they were somehow their own.

And if you present your material at a conference, you are presenting it. It's there for people to see. Anyone who attends can see it. To actually state that no one is allowed to use it henceforth, in essence saying "forget what you just saw here" is also wrong, I think.

Now, concerning the data themselves. Fermi recently reported a "dark pulsar" seen only in high-energy gamma rays, and inferred that there might be a LOT of these in the Milky Way. I think this should be taken into account, as it might handily explain the positron excess.

Though the Dark Matter explanation would be much more profound.