August 9, 2006

Corrections large and small

Posted by Arcane Gazebo at August 9, 2006 3:41 PM

Last night I was struggling to reconcile several different measurements of our SQUID's critical current when I saw (via Rob Knop) that astronomers are revising their own estimates of the age of the universe.

This made me feel better, because I just had to account for a few hundred nanoamps and not a couple billion years. On the other hand, their percentage correction was smaller...

Tags: Science
Comments

so the question is does size matter?

Posted by: shellock | August 9, 2006 3:44 PM

or just how accurate you are with it

Posted by: shellock | August 9, 2006 3:44 PM

Some field-theoretic calculations are considered successful if they're correct within several orders of magnitude. The example that comes to mind (although there are many) is estimates of 3-body scattering lengths in BECs.

Posted by: Mason | August 10, 2006 1:32 AM
Post a comment