[joshcryer]

That paper unfairly jabs at "Schwinger's numerology" because he chose the fine-structure constant in the equation (probably a guess, because he never published the theory behind it). It turns out the magnetic moment of the electron is one of the if not the most accurately measured thing in all of physics, and it fits perfectly with it. So the basis of the entire article, that the g-factor "was obtained using illegitimate mathematical traps" is just misleading.

You have to do the experiment to get the number, if the number doesn't fit with the experiment you have to figure out how to arrange the equation to fit with the experiment. I find this truly the basis for scientific progress. Even if we don't understand yet why it works the way it does. Why is the fine-structure constant everywhere in physics? It's not a hack it's experimentally derivable and has been reproduced over and over again.

I don't see anything inherently wrong with what those scientists "did" with their fudging and playing with numbers. Experimentalists are not infallible. That's why we need reproduction and for others to think up other experiments and to do them. That's what science is about. Nice history paper though.