|
|
|
|
|
|
by __MatrixMan__
703 days ago
|
|
|
> it's actually worse when you find out it is in fact correct but it goes against everything in biology books: how the hell are you going to explain this to people? Maybe it's just a cultural difference between biology and physics, but don't they build those huge supercolliders because they're hoping to find something that they can't explain? The more theory you can destroy with evidence the better... or so I thought. |
|
|
The difference here is that they were not looking for something crazy, they just wanted to measure things to enable policy makers to make a well-informed decision. Then you unexpectedly find something crazy, and you don't have a clear answer right away.
Imagine being the first person to spot a black swan, and you happen to be a biologist, but your research didn't have anything to do with birds. That's a pretty big derail, and I don't think every scientist would be happy in that scenario.