Hacker News Reader

Hold up, this is a different thing than what [1] and [2] are responding to.

Yes, I'm totally lost. Was there accidental confusion here? Or is the new paper (by completely different authors) somehow building on those other papers and flick is implying it suffers from the same criticisms?

Would love to know if this is genuinely newsworthy or not.

It would be pretty impressive indeed if [1] countered this article, since the Arxiv preprint came online 6 days later.

Thanks! It’s a little disingenuous/irresponsible on part of the phys.org article to not even mention the Rubin+Heitlauf rebuttal and the ensuing discussion, even though they’re from a month ago. EDIT: No wait, this OP is about a different paper from a week later... Hmm.... interesting times.