3
$\begingroup$

Today I read about this paper making the case that neutrinos have imaginary mass and travel faster than light. I want to get excited, but I have no way to know how likely it is that this paper will be debunked, except that anything suggesting FTL better pass a pretty high bar.

So I'm hoping I can post the question here and get expert opinions about this paper; a kind of peer review for the layman's audience, if you will.

Title: Six observations consistent with the electron neutrino being a tachyon with mass: $m_{\nu_e}^2=-0.11 \pm 0.016 eV^2$

Authors: Ehrlich, Robert

Publication Date: 07/2014

URL: arXiv:1408.2804

Abstract: Six observations based on data and fits to data from a variety of areas are consistent with the hypothesis that the electron neutrino is a $m_{\nu_e}^2 = -0.11 \pm 0.016 eV^2$ tachyon. The data are from areas including CMB fluctuations, gravitational lensing, cosmic ray spectra, neutrino oscillations, and $0\nu$ double beta decay. For each of the six observations it is possible under explicitly stated assumptions to compute a value for $m_{\nu_e}^2,$ and it is found that the six values are remarkably consistent with the above cited $\nu_e$ mass $(\chi^2=2.73).$ There are no known observations in clear conflict with the claimed result. Three checks are proposed to test the validity of the claim, one of which could be performed using existing data.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ The author basically wants to hide a pet hypothesis of his in the error bars of current experiments. That's not how science works. Absence of evidence is not presence of evidence to the contrary. $\endgroup$
    – CuriousOne
    Dec 27, 2014 at 15:16

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.