Re: Moral relativism.

John Feiler (john.feiler@attws.com)
Tue, 19 Aug 97 17:18:37 -0700


Actually, it's just 128 with some second order corrections.....

J

Begin forwarded message:

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Ernest N. Prabhakar" <ernest@alumni.caltech.edu>
To: BAISLEY@FNDCD.FNAL.GOV, FoRK@pest.w3.org
Subject: Re: Moral relativism.
Cc: Baisley@fnal.gov

>> 137
> It's the inverse of the Fine Structure Constant
> It's something you should know about.

Oh, THAT. Of course I know what it is. It is just that the early attempts
to find cosmic significance in it being 137 lost some weight when it was
discovered it was not an actual integer (being off by like 0.01% or something).
Plus, that is really only the long-term field effect of a bunch of virtual
charges, hence it varies greatly at short distances. If it isn't an
answer to life the universe and everything at 10^-33 cm, then it really
isn't a very useful answer at all.

So there.

-- Ernie "I am too a physicist" Prabhakar