n
key point: "The level of statistical confidence they quote would require almost 12 times as many
measurements: not the 16,111 events they did measure, but rather more like 193,000 events." (edit) when I click on the second link it's taking me to middle of the pdf, but just scroll to the start.
This effectively brings everything into a better perspective.
However, if I remember correctly, the most general postulates of restricted relativity do not talk about speed of light but about limit speed.
Interestingly enough, every time that science is facing a change or calls into question previously accepted theory newspapers (media) make it appears as a defeat for science.
But it's exactly the opposite: whenever a theory is reviewed is a victory of science, particularly physics , which testifies to the progress of knowledge and the ability to unblock knowledge.
Something unthinkable for any other discipline of "human knowledge".
Welcome is the "fall" of Einstein as it was of Newton and Galileo, because it is not falling: still today we fly or see satellite television thanks to Newtonian mechanics, or use the GPS due to both (say Newton and Einstein).
We might have simply discovered that the description of "reality" to the level of the neutrino, well, is once again different from what we expected, well a lot more work for a new generation of physicist.
