Observations re OPERA at San Grasso

Responses to the OPERA results are interesting, and  a BBC TV documentary on Tuesday 18th Oct 2011 summarised that opinion is finely balanced between systematic errors and the results being correct.  My course leader however told me that errors is the very probable explanation - think this is too conservative an interim conclusion.  The doco said over 100 papers have been published to discuss/review, well I have no time to find or read them, but have seen some blogs which indicate that neutrinos have a licence to behave oddly, and we should keep an open mind. Hardly any mass, very weakly interacting with baryons, very limited info about them so far.
Views have been expressed that they could be taking shortcuts through a universe with more than 4 dimensions, however these seem to relate to string theory with its 6 miniature dimensions, and reference to a 5th large dimension is only vague.  Talk of violating Special Relativity, yet isn't General Relativity itself an extension (hence "violation") of SR?
Talk of crossing cause and effect relationship, and time travel - but we are talking neutrinos here, they have a free pass.  Most intriuging to me (in the doco) is the recognition that in the Big Bang there was no speed limit, the laws of physics had not settled, and there is a scenario for laws to be broken. And a plaintive question from a lone blog responder "the biggest question is the existence of existence".  Too right mate.
It is beginning to fit, not only that cause and effect may have been / are being confused, but that they have to be.  As I said months ago, existence is the result of the conflict between the impossibility of existence and the impossibility of non-existence.  Let us take as read that for the Big Bang to happen our known rules and frames of reference are suspended.  The timescale of the Big Bang is such that only a logarithmic scale makes sense (on a linear scale, too much is happening to too much material & energy in too short a time), the implication of this being that t=0 does not exist, the start is always further back.  More work needed on how logs and exponents relate to the real world (after my career with dBs!).
So there is credibility among some professionals for the idea of a 5th large dimension, though I have not yet seen anyone ascribe a "shape" to it.  Why are they not seeing the bendiness of spacetime found in GR as evidence for a full 5thD?
I did some calculations to see if the 60ns / 16m lead of the neutrinos could be explained by gravitational lensing by the earth's mass, and neutrinos taking the "straight line" across curved spacetime.  But this would only account for 8mm, much less than the experimental error (position accuracy 20cm over 733km, time accuracy 2ns over I think 2ms).  And leads nicely to the spacetime curve being much larger than the tiny bump caused by the earth.  My thoughts from Cuba were that the gravitional attraction between masses is but a symptom or artifact of the real force of gravity, which is many times larger.  Let's take another look at G.  Funny that the reciprocal of the Hubble Constant gives us an estimate of the age of the Universe, how elegant if 1/G had a comparable real result.
My limited or focussed reading/study has so far isolated me from other views confirming my suspicion of the toroidal 5th dimension, its properties including: all gravitational energy stored in its rotation, yet still powers the universe (formed in the Big Bang like a big smoke ring); it is expanding as cosmologists observe (but being a toroid can expand in its big R and its little r); in this model is the explanation for dark energy, and dark mass whereby galaxies stick together due to the spacetime curvature on the galactic scale; the toroid "surface" has both positive and negative curvature.  I am also thinking that the phenomenon of inflation (instantaneous expansion shortly after the BB) could relate to the formation of the shape of the toroid, ie the start of the "hole".  Study required of how doughnuts are made.