Building a measurement system based on C

In summary, the conversation discusses the idea of creating a system of measurement based on a universal constant such as the speed of light, where c=1 unit. It is mentioned that this idea has already been implemented in fields such as relativity and particle physics, where it is common to use units where c=1. However, it is also noted that the speed of light alone is not sufficient to define a unit of length or time, and other physical constants may be needed. The conversation also touches on the use of other natural units and fundamental physical constants in measurement systems. Various resources are suggested for further reading on the topic.
  • #1
jnorman
316
0
I always try to assume that pretty much anything I think of has been thought of before, so I am relatively sure that this is also not a new question.

we base our current measurement systems on arbitrary lengths such as the meter or foot, etc. there are certain applications where we use actual physical constants, but in general, all our measurements, since they are based on arbitrary items like the meter, are very awkward numbers with lots of decimal points - hard to remember and not reflective of the real constants of the universe.

so, my question - has someone considered, or actually developed a system of measurement that is based on a true universal constant such as the speed of light - ie, where C=1 unit, or something similar? where can I read about this topic?

thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
jnorman said:
so, my question - has someone considered, or actually developed a system of measurement that is based on a true universal constant such as the speed of light - ie, where C=1 unit, or something similar? where can I read about this topic?
It's very common to use units where c = 1 in relativity and particle physics. See: Natural units
 
  • #3
jnorman said:
I always try to assume that pretty much anything I think of has been thought of before, so I am relatively sure that this is also not a new question.

we base our current measurement systems on arbitrary lengths such as the meter or foot, etc. there are certain applications where we use actual physical constants, but in general, all our measurements, since they are based on arbitrary items like the meter, are very awkward numbers with lots of decimal points - hard to remember and not reflective of the real constants of the universe.

so, my question - has someone considered, or actually developed a system of measurement that is based on a true universal constant such as the speed of light - ie, where C=1 unit, or something similar? where can I read about this topic?

thanks.
The meter used to be defined as a physical length but now it is defined as how far light travels in 1/299,792,458 of a second, so yes, your idea has already been thought of and implemented.
 
  • #4
gentlemen - thanks for your responses - the wiki article on natural units was quite helpful.
 
  • #5
jnorman said:
I always try to assume that pretty much anything I think of has been thought of before, so I am relatively sure that this is also not a new question.

we base our current measurement systems on arbitrary lengths such as the meter or foot, etc. there are certain applications where we use actual physical constants, but in general, all our measurements, since they are based on arbitrary items like the meter, are very awkward numbers with lots of decimal points - hard to remember and not reflective of the real constants of the universe.

so, my question - has someone considered, or actually developed a system of measurement that is based on a true universal constant such as the speed of light - ie, where C=1 unit, or something similar? where can I read about this topic?

thanks.

The speed of light isn't sufficient to have a system of measurements, because you still need to choose a unit of length, and that's kind of arbitrary. You could base the unit of length on something physical, such as the Bohr radius of a hydrogen atom, or the Planck distance.
 
  • #6
stevendaryl said:
The speed of light isn't sufficient to have a system of measurements, because you still need to choose a unit of length, and that's kind of arbitrary. You could base the unit of length on something physical, such as the Bohr radius of a hydrogen atom, or the Planck distance.

HUH ? The speed of light DEFINES the unit of length (did you not read the previous responses?). What is needed in addition to it is the unit of TIME to complete the definition and we have a well-defined unit of time, called the second, which is based on the cesium atom.
 
  • #7
phinds said:
HUH ? The speed of light DEFINES the unit of length (did you not read the previous responses?). What is needed in addition to it is the unit of TIME to complete the definition and we have a well-defined unit of time, called the second, which is based on the cesium atom.

Well, using the speed of light as a conversion factor, you can either have a unit of length L, and get a unit of time T by letting T = L/c, or you can have a unit of time T, and get a unit of length by letting L = cT. In either case, you need another unit.
 
  • #8
phinds said:
HUH ? The speed of light DEFINES the unit of length (did you not read the previous responses?). What is needed in addition to it is the unit of TIME to complete the definition and we have a well-defined unit of time, called the second, which is based on the cesium atom.

phinds, the speed of light only defines a unit speed. to define a unit length from c you need a unit time or to define a unit time from c you need a unit length.

the unit time based solely on the cesium atom could be (among other candidates) a period of time that is 1/9192631770th second. the 9192631770 is solely anthropometric, not a definition from nature at all. and the choice of the cesium atom might seem to be a bit more arbitrary than the choice of [itex]c[/itex], [itex]G[/itex], or [itex]\hbar[/itex]. but for us humans, at this stage in our development, a clock based on 133Cs makes for a much more stable and reproducible and accurate clock than one based on [itex]G[/itex]. so what is practical for humans at present is not what is ultimately a natural system of units.

i might recommend to the OP to look up Planck units and fundamental physical constants in wikipedia also. and maybe check out the Baez and two Duff articles cited. there is an older version of the Natural units article that spoke more fundamentally about building various systems of units based solely on natural and universal quantities.
 
  • #9
Let time be measured in nanoseconds and length be measured in feet. Error should be less than 3%.
 

1. What is a measurement system based on C?

A measurement system based on C is a system for collecting, organizing, and analyzing data using the programming language C. It allows for precise and efficient measurement of various parameters and is often used in scientific research and engineering.

2. What are the advantages of using C for building a measurement system?

C is a low-level programming language that offers high performance and control over memory management, making it ideal for building a measurement system. It also has a large community and a wide range of libraries and tools available for data processing and analysis.

3. Can a measurement system based on C be used for real-time data acquisition?

Yes, C is well-suited for real-time data acquisition as it can handle large amounts of data quickly and efficiently. It also has features such as pointers and direct memory access that allow for fast data processing.

4. Do I need to have a strong background in C to build a measurement system?

While having a strong understanding of C is beneficial, it is not necessary to have a deep knowledge of the language to build a measurement system. There are many resources available, such as tutorials and documentation, to help you learn and implement C for your project.

5. Are there any limitations to using C for building a measurement system?

One limitation of using C is that it requires more manual coding and can be more complex compared to higher-level languages. It also does not offer as many built-in data analysis tools, so you may need to use external libraries or develop your own algorithms for data processing.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
5
Replies
146
Views
7K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
31
Views
830
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
199
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
64
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
761
Back
Top