= Solution
The annotations on the original plot give $\beta=0.368$ and $\gamma=1.215$. Use those displayed values rather than fitting the linear-axis curve as though its slope were a logarithmic exponent. <Exponent inference from a magnetic data collapse> identifies $\Delta=\gamma+\beta$.
$$
\begin{aligned}
\Delta&=\beta+\gamma=1.583,\\
\alpha&=2-2\beta-\gamma=0.049,\\
\delta&=1+\gamma/\beta=4.30163\ldots,\\
\nu&=(2-\alpha)/3=0.650333\ldots,\\
\eta&=2-\gamma/\nu=0.131727\ldots .
\end{aligned}
$$
Therefore
$$
\boxed{\alpha\approx0.049,\quad\Delta\approx1.583,\quad\delta\approx4.30,\quad\nu\approx0.650,\quad\eta\approx0.132.}
$$
These estimates inherit both the empirical collapse exponents and the assumed scaling identities, including three-dimensional <hyperscaling>. They are not independent high-precision measurements of five exponents. In particular, the small difference defining $\alpha$ and the subtraction defining $\eta$ amplify uncertainties. No experimental curve or source image is reproduced.
Back to article page
