I have a possible explanation. However I have very little confidence in it and primarily proffer it for entertainment value, since I think Douglas_Knight’s post may have been a joke.
There have been 4 opera threads I’ve noted. This one, and 3 previous.
September was the initial thread (They may be breaking light speed?) No near top comment that I found (I did not check sub threads).
October was a possible counter argument thread. Vladimir objected to me posting this thread. For more than one reason, and I appreciated his critique.
November was the additional confirming evidence thread. No near top comment that I found (I did not check sub threads)
February is another counter argument thread. Vladimir objected to the posting of this thread.
This is just barely enough evidence for accusing Vladimir of publication bias to be funny (you’ve objected to 2 retractions and you haven’t objected to 2 confirmations!), but not enough to be taken seriously. And humor tends to be upvoted well. I think.
That being said, I would not be surprised to be TOTALLY off base on Douglas_Knight’s comment, since this is just my Internal Narrator trying to mash together evidence for a hypothesis to explain what I think is a joke. If for instance, he wasn’t joking, this is all just a silly theory.
Other thoughts to consider:
How many people are going to read through all of those threads just to make a stats joke? Apparently, this includes myself.
If enough of the same people think “Opera Anomaly? I want to read this!” They may have been subconciously aware of Vladimir_Nesov’s earlier comments. When Douglas Knight completed the loop out loud, it may have been funny, since some humor tends to contain a “Complete this pattern that I am aware of but have not actually verbalized!” format.
That may have been too much expansion. But on the upside, there are also links to previous Opera threads. Feel free to come up with a better (or more entertaining) hypothesis of Douglas_Knight’s remarks based on that reading.
Could someone expand on this? I don’t get it.
I have a possible explanation. However I have very little confidence in it and primarily proffer it for entertainment value, since I think Douglas_Knight’s post may have been a joke.
There have been 4 opera threads I’ve noted. This one, and 3 previous.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/8hh/opera_confirms_neutrinos_travel_faster_than_light/ (November, XiXiDu)
http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/83c/particles_may_not_have_broken_light_speed_limit/ (October, Me)
http://lesswrong.com/lw/7rc/particles_break_lightspeed_limit/ (September, Kevin)
September was the initial thread (They may be breaking light speed?) No near top comment that I found (I did not check sub threads). October was a possible counter argument thread. Vladimir objected to me posting this thread. For more than one reason, and I appreciated his critique. November was the additional confirming evidence thread. No near top comment that I found (I did not check sub threads) February is another counter argument thread. Vladimir objected to the posting of this thread.
This is just barely enough evidence for accusing Vladimir of publication bias to be funny (you’ve objected to 2 retractions and you haven’t objected to 2 confirmations!), but not enough to be taken seriously. And humor tends to be upvoted well. I think.
That being said, I would not be surprised to be TOTALLY off base on Douglas_Knight’s comment, since this is just my Internal Narrator trying to mash together evidence for a hypothesis to explain what I think is a joke. If for instance, he wasn’t joking, this is all just a silly theory.
Other thoughts to consider:
How many people are going to read through all of those threads just to make a stats joke? Apparently, this includes myself.
If enough of the same people think “Opera Anomaly? I want to read this!” They may have been subconciously aware of Vladimir_Nesov’s earlier comments. When Douglas Knight completed the loop out loud, it may have been funny, since some humor tends to contain a “Complete this pattern that I am aware of but have not actually verbalized!” format.
That may have been too much expansion. But on the upside, there are also links to previous Opera threads. Feel free to come up with a better (or more entertaining) hypothesis of Douglas_Knight’s remarks based on that reading.