<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Six observations consistent with the electron neutrino being a tachyon with mass: $m_{ν_e}^2=-0.11 \pm 0.016 eV^2$ · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2804/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2804/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Six observations consistent with the electron neutrino being a tachyon with mass: $m_{ν_e}^2=-0.11 \pm 0.016 eV^2$ — mentioned by Steuard</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8800601</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1408.2804:8800601</guid><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2014 22:04:00 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This article on phys.org appears to be taken verbatim from a press release written by the paper&amp;#x27;s author, Robert Erlech. (Here&amp;#x27;s his website: http://mason.gmu.edu/~rehrlich/) From that site, here&amp;#x27;s a link to what seems to be the original paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2804 Just as a minor quality signifier, it looks like this paper is categorized under gen-ph (&amp;quot;General Physics&amp;quot;) on arXiv.org. That&amp;#x27;s unusual for mainstream research: topics like this would usually be categorized as &amp;quot;High energy physics&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Astrophysics&amp;quot;. I don&amp;#x27;t know exactly what criteria arXiv.org uses to judge when a paper…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2804/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.gen-ph</category></item><item><title>Six observations consistent with the electron neutrino being a tachyon with mass: $m_{ν_e}^2=-0.11 \pm 0.016 eV^2$ — mentioned by codezero</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799669</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1408.2804:8799669</guid><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:44:20 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I am always weary of a sole authored physics paper, especially in particle physics. Either he had nobody working with him, or nobody wanted their name associated with the work, both raise red flags these days. Direct link to arxiv paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2804&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2804/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.gen-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
