<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The OPERA Measurement &amp; the Peer-Review Process</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on work and life from particle physicists from around the world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 16:14:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scientific Journal Publication &#124; BvA-TeC</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-34717</link>
		<dc:creator>Scientific Journal Publication &#124; BvA-TeC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:41:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-34717</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] The OPERA Measurement &amp; The Peer-Review Process (quantumdiaries.org) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The OPERA Measurement &amp; The Peer-Review Process (quantumdiaries.org) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Dorney</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-34431</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Dorney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:43:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-34431</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Derek,

An excellent question!  If you look in Section 4 of OPERA&#039;s manuscript (the arXiv link above), they describe their measurement of the distance between the origin of the Neutrino Beam and the OPERA Detector (they even take into account continental drift!).  This distance is measured with a precision of 20 centimeters.  The OPERA team acknowledges this 20 centimeter uncertainty has an affect on their measurement, and takes this into account by attributing what&#039;s known as a &quot;systematic uncertainty&quot; to their measurement.  Light would take 0.67 nanoseconds to travel this distance.  So the OPERA Collaboration adds, in quadrature, these 0.67 nanoseconds as a systematic uncertainty on their time of flight measurement; as can be seen in Table 2 on page 24 of the OPERA Manuscript (again see arXiv Link above).

So yes, the distance used in OPERA&#039;s Calculation could be off by 20 centimeters &lt;strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;at most&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.  But the uncertainty in time due to this  is only 0.67 nanoseconds.  Since this time is two orders of magnitude less than OPERA&#039;s Results, we can say that this 20 centimeter uncertainty in the path length does not affect the result significantly.

Hope this helps,
-Brian]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Derek,</p>
<p>An excellent question!  If you look in Section 4 of OPERA&#8217;s manuscript (the arXiv link above), they describe their measurement of the distance between the origin of the Neutrino Beam and the OPERA Detector (they even take into account continental drift!).  This distance is measured with a precision of 20 centimeters.  The OPERA team acknowledges this 20 centimeter uncertainty has an affect on their measurement, and takes this into account by attributing what&#8217;s known as a &#8220;systematic uncertainty&#8221; to their measurement.  Light would take 0.67 nanoseconds to travel this distance.  So the OPERA Collaboration adds, in quadrature, these 0.67 nanoseconds as a systematic uncertainty on their time of flight measurement; as can be seen in Table 2 on page 24 of the OPERA Manuscript (again see arXiv Link above).</p>
<p>So yes, the distance used in OPERA&#8217;s Calculation could be off by 20 centimeters <strong> <em>at most</em></strong>.  But the uncertainty in time due to this  is only 0.67 nanoseconds.  Since this time is two orders of magnitude less than OPERA&#8217;s Results, we can say that this 20 centimeter uncertainty in the path length does not affect the result significantly.</p>
<p>Hope this helps,<br />
-Brian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Derek</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-34423</link>
		<dc:creator>Derek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-34423</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not even remotely a scientist, but the one thing that struck me (although it may be extremely trivial and a non-issue) is knowing the exact distance between source and receiver.  I am assuming that the original finding of ~1.000025 times the speed of light is determined by comparing the actual time it took the neutrinos (which can pass through the Earth&#039;s crust) to travel the distance and dividing the distance by the speed of light to determine how long a photon (which cannot pass through the Earth&#039;s crust) would have done so.  What if the distance they are assuming is incorrect?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not even remotely a scientist, but the one thing that struck me (although it may be extremely trivial and a non-issue) is knowing the exact distance between source and receiver.  I am assuming that the original finding of ~1.000025 times the speed of light is determined by comparing the actual time it took the neutrinos (which can pass through the Earth&#8217;s crust) to travel the distance and dividing the distance by the speed of light to determine how long a photon (which cannot pass through the Earth&#8217;s crust) would have done so.  What if the distance they are assuming is incorrect?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Dorney</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-33629</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Dorney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 14:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-33629</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[helmingstay,

Update: Just now realized this was not my post giving an update on the OPERA measurement, please see this post regarding the issue: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/18/an-update-from-opera/

The purpose of this blog post was to publicize the latest update from the OPERA Collaboration regarding their recent muon-neutrino time of flight measurement.  If you&#039;ll look in the press release quote I posted above, you&#039;ll see that the OPERA Collaboration has indeed submitted their manuscript to a peer review journal, the Journal of High Energy Physics, just this past week.  I anticipate the reviewers at JHEP will be in correspondence with the OPERA Collaboration in the near future (i.e. we will know if it is published soon).

Additionally, large scientific collaborations such as OPERA, CMS, DZero, etc... all conduct their own internal peer-review process before releasing any results to the public, or the rest of the scientific community.  This is an additional level of the peer-review process that ensures top quality results are published by scientific experiments.

Hope this helps.

Best,
-Brian]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>helmingstay,</p>
<p>Update: Just now realized this was not my post giving an update on the OPERA measurement, please see this post regarding the issue: <a href="http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/18/an-update-from-opera/" rel="nofollow">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/18/an-update-from-opera/</a></p>
<p>The purpose of this blog post was to publicize the latest update from the OPERA Collaboration regarding their recent muon-neutrino time of flight measurement.  If you&#8217;ll look in the press release quote I posted above, you&#8217;ll see that the OPERA Collaboration has indeed submitted their manuscript to a peer review journal, the Journal of High Energy Physics, just this past week.  I anticipate the reviewers at JHEP will be in correspondence with the OPERA Collaboration in the near future (i.e. we will know if it is published soon).</p>
<p>Additionally, large scientific collaborations such as OPERA, CMS, DZero, etc&#8230; all conduct their own internal peer-review process before releasing any results to the public, or the rest of the scientific community.  This is an additional level of the peer-review process that ensures top quality results are published by scientific experiments.</p>
<p>Hope this helps.</p>
<p>Best,<br />
-Brian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Debbie Diktiz</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-33602</link>
		<dc:creator>Debbie Diktiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 11:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-33602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;the neutrino’s did not travel faster than light.&quot;  
What possession of the neutrinos did not travel faster than light?  Where and what is this unreferenced object?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;the neutrino’s did not travel faster than light.&#8221;<br />
What possession of the neutrinos did not travel faster than light?  Where and what is this unreferenced object?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: helmingstay</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-33495</link>
		<dc:creator>helmingstay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 02:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-33495</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For all the discussion of peer-reviewed literature, there is not a single peer-reviewed article referenced in this blog post.  It seems like an odd argument to invoke when the argument boils down to &quot;believe me and not those guys over there&quot;, does it not?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For all the discussion of peer-reviewed literature, there is not a single peer-reviewed article referenced in this blog post.  It seems like an odd argument to invoke when the argument boils down to &#8220;believe me and not those guys over there&#8221;, does it not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neutrini in sorpasso &#171; Tutti a Zanzibar</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/01/the-opera-measurement-the-peer-review-process/#comment-33131</link>
		<dc:creator>Neutrini in sorpasso &#171; Tutti a Zanzibar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 02:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=17138#comment-33131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Brian Dorney &#8220;The OPERA Measurement &amp; the Peer-Review Process&#8220; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Brian Dorney &#8220;The OPERA Measurement &amp; the Peer-Review Process&#8220; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
