Ranter
Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Comments
-
@Lensflare
"Dimensionless number" is technically incorrect.
4 is a quantity of dimension *one*.
http://iso.org/sites/JCGM/...
> The term “dimensionless quantity” is commonly used and is kept here for historical reasons. It stems from the fact that all exponents are zero in the symbolic representation of the dimension for such quantities. The term “quantity of dimension one” reflects the convention in which the symbolic representation of the dimension for such quantities is the symbol 1
(Fully aware that no one except autist level 9000 people care about these kinds of technicalities) -
@bittersweet that was an interesting read. Right after posting my comment, I also had this thought like "Is this true? Isn’t the dimension just one?" But then I compared it to the fine structure constant alpha (which is called a dimensionless quantity) and thought it must be correct.
-
@Lensflare
Yeah it's one of those useless factoids which only hyperautistic mathematicians care about, while the rest of the science/engineering world answers "who the fuck cares, conventions don't need to make sense as long as people know what you mean"
Related Rants
Did you know crocodiles could grow up to 15 feet? But most just have 4.
joke/meme
funny