31–33 of 33 posts
>> “This was so strange that we sat on this observation for several years” >> "We tried for five years to model the production of the positrons" Why would a scientist withhold data for 6 years? How typical is it for scientists to not reveal data until they can explain it using current models? I would think that Dwyer would have rushed to publicize such fascinating results.
>> “This was so strange that we sat on this observation for several years” >> "We tried for five years to model the production of the positrons" Why would a scientist withhold data for 6 years? How typical is it for scientists to not reveal data until they can explain it using current models? I would think that Dwyer would have rushed to publicize such fascinating results.
Darwin waited 20 years, and only published after another naturalist was about to publish the same theory.
>> “This was so strange that we sat on this observation for several years” >> "We tried for five years to model the production of the positrons" Why would a scientist withhold data for 6 years? How typical is it for scientists to not reveal data until they can explain it using current models? I would think that Dwyer would have rushed to publicize such fascinating results.
It mostly depends on how close to tenure they are, and how controversial the data is. e.g. Dan Shechtman, who recently got a nobel for his work in crystallography, was an outcast for a long while because his data did not fit with the prevailing model - to the point that people in his lab refused to peek through his microscope eyeviewer because what he said they will see there should not have been possible. Read http:…
Ah yes, the ever popular "Nyah Nyah Nyah I can't hear you" scientific method. I wonder how much progress has been held back due to scientists like that.