From: Noah Roberts (roberts.noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-19 11:40:30
Matthias Schabel wrote:
> The point is that the
> needs to be congruent with the unit system that the constant k is
> defined in...
Thus my desire for the xxx * unit that would convert k from the units it
is written in to the unit system being used. There are times when you
won't want to do this if precision is an issue but in the main, if
there's a conversion somewhere to get into the units used by this EQ and
out, you're loosing precision anyway.
I wonder, have you read "Object-oriented units of measurement" by Allen
>> I think in another post you yourself indicate how these
>> defined-by-convention "systems" of units used by physicists cause some
>> awkwardness, because a system might not define the units for
>> momentum to
>> be equal to the units of mass times the units of distance divided
>> by the
>> units of time, creating the need for extra conversions.
> I don't understand what you're getting at here...
IE, gallons for volume. There are different definitions of gallon, some
relate to L^3, some do not. There are other units in some dimensions
that are not derived from any component dimension's units.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk