Geek test

[jpmassar]

Match the following digit sequences with the corresponding
Universal Constants (without references, of course):

1.602176487 Planck's constant (Joule-seconds

Comments

[adbjupe]

Hrm, physics classes have been a long long time ago. But I did get the speed of light right. But then again, I am used to the metric system and have it a bit easier. And I used to like dealing with Newtons physics knowing the gravitational constant. But not anymore.

[prock]

I cheated, to get 4/5 I had to assign both Gravity and Plank to the same number.

[jpmassar]

to get 4/5 I had to assign both Gravity and Plank to the same number

That's not true. I thought you taught
'The Fundamental Constants of Cheating and Logic',
but at least one of these statements must be wrong.

[sabyl]

I was wondering how anyone would get 4 of 5

[jpmassar]

But what's really interesting is how one gets Seven of Nine.

[barking_iguana]

Mental conversion from English to Metric gives me one of them. I have no idea of the others. I could guess, giving me an expected value of two, but I'll stick with one.

I've never really cared to memorize such constants. They can be looked up. The forms of the equations say how the universe works, which is interesting. The scaling factors, I remain to be convinced are interesting.

[jpmassar]

that's why it's a geek quiz...

[tiurin]

There's (at least) one constant that's interesting- the fine-structure constant.

[jpmassar]

All constants are interesting (a corollary of the fact that
all integers are interesting).

[stevecohen]

Though leaving out the exponents seems a bit unfair.

[jpmassar]

For FSM's sake, one more time: It's a geek test!
(-:

[stevecohen]

But we geeks love us some precision! The FSM would not approve of leaving important information off of her universal constants.

May you be touched by his noodly appendage anyway.

[jpmassar]

The FSM would not approve of leaving important information off of her universal constants

Very true. But I didn't. I said match the following digit
sequences with the corresponding Universal Constants. The
only legitimate criticism is the fact that I included a decimal
point, which makes the candidates arguably not 'digit sequences'.

I left off the exponents on purpose. Too much information.
E.g., at least for me, an exponent of 10**23 would immediately
reference Avogadro's number, regardless of any other information.

[jpmassar]

Oops. Doesn't seem to let me edit the poll.