/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9906771
>>cherrypicking on the weaker critique to hide the fact that you can't respond to the stronger one


Alright. Lets go through the "critics" one by one referenced in that wikipedia article

>Chris Lee
A pop sci journalist for Ars technica. Nice opinion, but not a refutation.

>Herbert Winful
>Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan
>publishes his refutation on a Quantum Mechanics experiment on arXiv instead of a peer reviewed journal

Gee I wonder why? Maybe because he is overreaching his domain of expertise?

>Aephraim M. Steinberg
>Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of Toronto, Canada, doesn't dispute Nimtz and Stahlhofen's results.

Not sure why he's included as opponent to Nimtz experiments, but ok :^)

>Apart from these interpretations further authors have published papers arguing that quantum tunneling does not violate the relativistic notion of causality, and that Nimtz's experiments (which are argued to be purely classical in nature) don't violate it either.[12]

So basically nobody has actually bothered to disprove the experimental results obtained by Nimtz and are instead coping by saying "ahaha so FTL travel doesn't disprove Einstein after all...ahahaha....!"