[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/04/17/scientists-find-giant-elusive-clam-known-as-the-unicorn-of-mollusks/[/url][QUOTE]Unlike with other shipworms, named because they ate their way into the sides of wooden boats, no one knew where the giant shipworm lived.[/QUOTE]

[url=www.truth-out.org/news/item/40223-the-legacy-of-monsanto-s-pcbs-oozing-pus-birth-defects-and-immune-problems#14924205197651]The Legacy of Monsanto's PCBs: Oozing Pus, Birth Defects and Immune Problems[/url] | TruthOut

[QUOTE=ewmayer;182293]Post interesting science news links (which may not warrant their own thread) here. For instance, the following astronomical story, brought to you by DeBeers:


[URL="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3492919.stm"]Diamond star thrills astronomers[/URL]: [I]Twinkling in the sky is a diamond star of 10 billion trillion trillion carats, astronomers have discovered.[/I][/QUOTE]

Don't tell the Vulcans.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;456970][URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/04/17/scientists-find-giant-elusive-clam-known-as-the-unicorn-of-mollusks/[/URL][/QUOTE]
I'll see your giant ship worm, and raise with the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoduck"]geoduck[/URL].

Bose-Einstein condensate shows [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39642992"]negative mass[/URL]

[url]http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/04/explaining_science_won_t_fix_information_illiteracy.html[/url][QUOTE]This is because the way most scientists think about science communication—that just explaining the real science better will help—is plain wrong. In fact, it’s so wrong that it may have the opposite effect of what they’re trying to achieve.[/QUOTE]

Some fascinating [URL="http://lhcb-public.web.cern.ch/lhcb-public/Welcome.html#RDst"]stuff from CERN[/URL]. Well below the 5σ level but also worth reading and keeping an eye on it IMAO.

[QUOTE=xilman;457123]Some fascinating [URL="http://lhcb-public.web.cern.ch/lhcb-public/Welcome.html#RDst"]stuff from CERN[/URL]. Well below the 5σ level but also worth reading and keeping an eye on it IMAO.[/QUOTE]
That's from 2015?

Compare: [url]https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.06711v1[/url]

[QUOTE=Dubslow;457403]That's from 2015?[/QUOTE]

xilman included a link which contained a relative link within a page in the URI (a hash symbol included in the URI before hashtags became all the rage).

If you scroll up to the top of the page there is a post dated 2017.04.18 which could be really quite exciting! :smile:

TLDR: [URL="http://lhcb-public.web.cern.ch/lhcb-public/Welcome.html"]For those who don't understand how the Wild Wobbly Web works[/URL], click this link and then scroll down. The only difference is it doesn't have a hash in the URI.

[QUOTE=chalsall;457407]xilman included a link which contained a relative link within a page in the URI (a hash symbol included in the URI before hashtags became all the rage).

If you scroll up to the top of the page there is a post dated 2017.04.18 which could be really quite exciting! :smile:

TLDR: [URL="http://lhcb-public.web.cern.ch/lhcb-public/Welcome.html"]For those who don't understand how the Wild Wobbly Web works[/URL], click this link and then scroll down. The only difference is it doesn't have a hash in the URI.[/QUOTE]

Aha, yes. I had actually noticed that but it hadn't occurred to me that it might not be intentional.

The original comment I was going to make, before noticing the date of the actually-if-not-intended-ly linked article, was something along the lines of "wasn't there some anomaly reported at 2sigma a couple years ago that went absolutely nowhere?"... which seems to be quite relevant to the possibly-intended 2017-04-18 article, by way of referencing the 2015 article. The two are nearly exactly the same, differing in the target in the decay of B0 to either a D* or K* meson with lepton byproducts, where the branching ratio of the different lepton byproducts seems to be measured at non-SM values. The D* non-SM-ness seems to have been debunked (or so I assume having heard nothing about it since) while the K* is currently where the D* was two years ago.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;457455]Aha, yes. I had actually noticed that but it hadn't occurred to me that it might not be intentional.[/QUOTE]Hanlon's Razor applies.

I have nothing to declare but my incompetence.