Clearer language.

[text-relativity-of-wrong-asimov.git] / The_Relativity_of_Wrong.txt

diff --git a/The_Relativity_of_Wrong.txt b/The_Relativity_of_Wrong.txt
index e42c4c49aaee4cb4215ccc62b1ecbd8a51e7803f..116d53676577d1f03fcd27314925cac2ed481bd6 100644 (file)
--- a/The_Relativity_of_Wrong.txt
+++ b/The_Relativity_of_Wrong.txt
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 From The Skeptical Inquirer, Fall 1989, Vol. 14, No. 1, Pp. 35-44
-_______________________________________________________________________
 
 The Relativity of Wrong
 
@@ -80,7 +79,7 @@ the fact that stretches of water (ponds and lakes) looked pretty flat
 on quiet days.
 
 Another way of looking at it is to ask what is the "curvature" of the
-earth's surface Over a considerable length, how much does the surface
+earth's surface.  Over a considerable length, how much does the surface
 deviate (on the average) from perfect flatness. The flat-earth theory
 would make it seem that the surface doesn't deviate from flatness at
 all, that its curvature is 0 to the mile.
@@ -189,7 +188,7 @@ kilometers (7,900 miles).
 The difference between the longest and shortest diameters is 44
 kilometers (27 miles), and that means that the "oblateness" of the
 earth (its departure from true sphericity) is 44/12755, or
-0.0034. This amounts to l/3 of 1 percent.
+0.0034. This amounts to 1/3 of 1 percent.
 
 To put it another way, on a flat surface, curvature is 0 per mile
 everywhere. On the earth's spherical surface, curvature is 0.000126
@@ -282,3 +281,5 @@ measurements have been enormously refined but the principle remains.
 Naturally, the theories we now have might be considered wrong in the
 simplistic sense of my English Lit correspondent, but in a much truer
 and subtler sense, they need only be considered incomplete.
+
+@footer@