I came out of the Purdue Physics Department with a Ph.D. and am very concerned that we are doing science by press release. Fischbach got in trouble with this at one point when he developed the "Fifth Force" which was based upon not understanding the experiments he was utilizing in his theory.
It is disturbing that the most likely culprit of detector interference was completely ignored by the group as they leaped to the exotic conclusion that variable nuclear decay rates are the culprit.
Standard practice in experimental physics is always assume the detector is at fault when you get unusual results and it is interesting that this is treated merely as a side topic by this research.
In short, this research is most likely bogus.
Slashdot Mirror
I came out of the Purdue Physics Department with a Ph.D. and am very concerned that we are doing science by press release. Fischbach got in trouble with this at one point when he developed the "Fifth Force" which was based upon not understanding the experiments he was utilizing in his theory. It is disturbing that the most likely culprit of detector interference was completely ignored by the group as they leaped to the exotic conclusion that variable nuclear decay rates are the culprit. Standard practice in experimental physics is always assume the detector is at fault when you get unusual results and it is interesting that this is treated merely as a side topic by this research. In short, this research is most likely bogus.