only after professional and scientific community review and consensus, or single handedly if discovery by a professional

Yes they should probably be released asap, suitably caveated that these are 1st indicative results only which are provisional and subject to review, correction and change.

They should be presented immediately but also with the neccessary mentions of potential flaws/refutations of the experiment. I think it’s fine as it keeps the field alive and well.

Hello Ladies and Gentlemen,

Information leaks and incomplete analysis can cause stress.

Even non- information leaks are to be questioned however.

In terms of research, we do know they are onto something. A discovery is in progress.

Omissions indicate generational supressions. These last 50 years.

Cultural omissions can last thousands of years.

So, while people get uncomfortable about info leaks, at least they are not left to be buried, culturally, as taboos.

With covid vaccines, no ten year trials existed. With Astro-Zenica, i got lockjaw. It lasted a few days, putting out my jawbone a half centimeter or so.

So sometimes the smoking gun has effects unplanned for. BICEP 2 showed galactic dust, not gravitational waves, but the search continues.

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/pt.6.3.20190326a/full/

My head says wait and get it verified, however my heart would say share the knowledge and others may contribute to an even better understanding

Observational data yes, wild conjecture no.

Share as provisional and under peer reviews.

I think a reasonable amount of peer review is necessary but to remain balanced and not go overboard with analysis paralysis.

I believe it is necessary to find a balance. When scientists make discoveries that could be really important they should share them with scientists as soon as they have good evidence. However they should make it clear that these are findings and not final facts. This way other researchers can look at the data try to get the results and find any mistakes.

What happened with the BICEP2 announcement is an example of why this is necessary. When they announced their discovery early it was exciting. It also caused confusion later on. This is because other studies suggested that the signal they found was probably caused by dust in space not by waves from the beginning of the universe. While announcing discoveries to the public can get people interested in science it is important to be clear about how sure or unsure the scientistsre

In general I think scientists can announce discoveries before everyone else has a chance to review them as long as they are honest about what they know and what they do not know and they are willing to let other people check their work. The BICEP2. Other major results like it should be shared in a way that is transparent and open to verification, by other scientists.

I think scientists can announce discoveries before everyone else has a chance to review them as long as they are honest about what they know and what they do not know and they are willing to let other people check their work. The BICEP2. Other major results like it should be shared in a way that is transparent and open to verification, by other scientists.