Subject: Re: [boost] [units] - learning to use, continued :)
From: Matthias Schabel (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-30 12:25:09
> It would be great if you added this to the directory
> `physical_dimensions`. Also for 2D and 3D.
> It's possible to have other representations as well, for example on
> *momentum*. Then in 1D it would be (momentum)^0.5
> There are a dozen of other representations possible. They are not
> very popular though.
> So I don't know, maybe it would be best if you added 6 wavefunction types:
> 1D, 2D, 3D for length and for momentum.
> I'm not sure about their naming though.
This is the problem with trying to support all possibilities in the library itself - complex naming that may or may
not make sense to the end user when the domain doesn't already have standardized terminology. In general
we have tried to make definition of new units relatively straightforward specifically because it isn't reasonable
to have complete coverage within the library itself. That being said, I know that there are various users who have
needs in the quantum domain - if there was a unified consensus on library extensions, we could certainly do that.
I know that Alfredo Correa was working on some natural units for quantum simulations - perhaps the two of you
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk