Scientific community is relieved that a new experiment shows neutrinos not moving faster than light, as previous experiments suggested [source 1=”<a” href=”http://news.in.gr/science-technology/article/?aid=1231186816″ 2=”target="_blank">Nature</a>,” 3=”<a” 4=”target="_blank">web” 5=”news</a>” language=”:”][/source]. Why would a scientist be “relieved” when hearing that an axiom (call me “constant speed of light”) is not proven wrong? What is that mysterious power underlying every axiom that makes us so keen into keeping them alive no matter what? If all Theory of Relativity is based on ONE experiment (call me Michelson–Morley), then why can’t another experiment prove it wrong? And how come the “scientific community” trusts one experiment over another, simply because the first verifies its favorite dogmas?
Please DO note: it is not that we have hundreds of experiments showing one things and only one showing another! The Michelson–Morley experiment did not even convince Morley himself, who conducted more experiments together with Miller. Those experiments were proving that the speed of light WAS NOT constant! (see Conspiracies for Fun – many truths are hidden inside fun things)
And now, even though two experiments (the initial Opera experiment and a verification one week afterwards) showed that neutrinos travel faster than light, one experiment was enough to refute the two previous ones and deem them “wrong”. Dogma! Oh Dogma! I love you dogma!