From: Deane Yang (deane_yang_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-15 16:58:14
Andy Little wrote:
> If you dont understand the basics, then by definition, the rest of your
> 'long reply' post is <****>.
Too bad. I was under the mistaken(?) impression that
part of dimensional analysis is knowing, for example, what dimension
results from multiplying, say, a length by a time. I was, frankly,
pretty surprised that you only recently realized that if you multiply
two quantities in the same dimension that the result should not be in
the same dimension.
Isn't that one of the first things you learn in dimensional analysis?
After all, when you multiply a length by a length, you get an area, no?
Read again the parts where I describe what operations are allowed
for relative and absolute dimensions and tell me if it makes any sense.
You're taking my informal remarks, drawing conclusions from them, and
then ignoring everything else I say. Like I said, too bad.
And let's try to forget I ever mentioned tensors. I do apologize for
that. It was meant only for other pure mathematicians who might be
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk