[boost] Re: runtime unit-modifiablephysical-quantitiesusingpqs1-00-01

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-04 20:28:50

"David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:btacrj$imr$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> "Andy Little" <andy_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:bta7us$bkg$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> > [...]
> > A physical-quantity is made of powers of  The Seven dimensions:
> > length, mass, time, temperature, current, amount-of-substance,
> > luminous intensity.
> > (aside  -please not lets get complicated :-) )
> > [...]
> > There are only 7 dimensions. Thats it.
> > [...]
>
> Surely this is ridiculous?  I can see an extreme reductionist arguing
> that you only need dimensions for space, time, and the fundamental
> forces.  And if you really want to get anal, then you could equate
> space and time, and end up with four dimensions (distance, mass,
> electroweak charge, strong charge).  Everything else is derived,
> right?  And if you buy superstring theory or quantum gravity, then
> you could probably get away with just one or two dimensions, right?
> But how useful is that?  Who cares if luminous intensity is really
> just photons/area?  It's still a useful dimension, right?  And even
> though temperature and energy are related, I think there's a lot of
> physicists that would be unhappy to not have a natural energy
> dimension without having to state it in derived terms.  Isn't it about
> expressing the solution in the problem domain?  Physicists write
> equations with Joules and Watts, not just N m and lbs.-ft./s.
>
> Dave
>

Absolutely.

Even if we were happy to be reductionists, would we really want to have to
update the library everytime the Fundamental Theory of Everything changes?
I'm just a casual observer, but I think the Fundamental Theory of Everything
may have a faster release cycle than boost. :)

Jonathan