The axiomatization of Quantity Calculus, the logical foundations of DA

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the incomplete axiomatization of Quantity Calculus (QC) despite its foundational elements and concepts. Participants express curiosity about the current state of research and whether the axiomatization task is feasible or necessary. Key inquiries include the best definitions of Quantity (Q) and Dimension (D) in Dimensional Analysis (DA), as well as the suitability of set theory like ZFC for a system akin to algebra. The conversation also touches on the challenge posed by different entities sharing the same dimensions, which complicates axiomatization. Overall, the thread seeks to clarify these foundational issues in Quantity Calculus.
logics
Messages
137
Reaction score
0
I was intrigued reading * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_calculus" that after two centuries axiomatization of QC has not been completed, though there are only 5 basic elements and 4[3] concepts:
S[tandard],= U[nit], D[imension], Q[uantity]. I suppose nobody here has tackled the problem or knows the state of the art or can tell whether the task is unnecessary or impossible, but, with your help, I would like to examine the problem.

I tried to gather basic scientific information, I found a "formal? " definition of Q http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity" in DA. Moreover, in the article * we read that QC... is "analogous" to a system of algebra with units instead of variables. Now, could you tell me if
1) VIM3's is the official, best definition available of Q
2) [you know or] where to find an appropriate definition of D in D[imensional] A[nalysis] and in relation to Q
3) set theory [arithmetics] ZFC is appropriate for a sistem "analogous" to algebra
4) the fact that different entities share same dimensions is an obstacle to axiomatization
5) there is a list of derived quantities
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
question 3) is discussed in another thread
5) I know there is a list, but I can't remember where I saw it (there were some 30 items). It is not at wiki : "list of derived quantities". This question is not important
 
Last edited:
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Replies
31
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top