What went wrong
Every retraction, with the arithmetic. 15 posts, best read in order.
-
I chose the exponent to make the number come out
N_hor = D_C to the power 72. Neighbouring exponents move the answer four decades. Nothing selected 72 except the answer.
-
The 12 pi that was not 12 pi
An identity I presented as independent confirmation, which is really a definition with a missing factor of omega lambda.
-
An exponent that missed by forty-nine orders of magnitude
The worst single error in the programme, and the odd comfort that it was caught by its own printed arithmetic.
-
a-zero: the formula that did not give its own answer
A critical acceleration whose stated formula evaluates to sixty-six per cent above the value claimed for it.
-
Nineteen over eighteen should have been ten over nine
A trigonometric sum that I bracketed correctly and then added up wrongly, in the same equation.
-
The efficiency I solved for instead of deriving
A divisor described as exact, which was in fact reverse-engineered from the measurement it was meant to predict.
-
Ten to the fourteen point five
A four-tier renormalisation cascade that misses its target by fourteen and a half orders of magnitude, with fitted exponents all the way down.
-
A rate that could not equal itself
Setting an expansion rate equal to a replication rate, differing by a factor of ten to the fifty-eight.
-
A table of quantum dimensions that summed wrong
A list of numbers I believed because I never added them. The correction was integers all along.
-
Yukawa ratios that fit nothing
Two ratios built on unspecified factors, disagreeing with the observed values by factors of two and five.
-
A phase picked after the answer was known
The primordial phase was presented as fixed by modular data. The channel and the prefactor were chosen to give pi over six.
-
The one over ten nobody could derive
A single coefficient that stood between a formula and a match, and where it came from, which is nowhere.
-
A thin-wall instanton that gave exactly one
Three factors of the same scale cancelling, so that a suppression of ten to the minus sixty-four came out as a third.
-
A leakage probability that exceeded one
An exponential that is not a probability, blowing up to ten to the twenty-seven at a modest input. The fix is in the archive.
-
Why I publish my own corrections
Fourteen retractions in one archive is unusual. Here is the argument for treating them as the most useful thing on the site.