I Dimensional analysis seems wrong for this equation: z = -1/(x^2+y^2)

AI Thread Summary
The equation z = -1/(x^2 + y^2) raises concerns regarding dimensional analysis, as x and y represent lengths while z appears to have dimensions of 1/(length)^2. Participants agree that the question is poorly formulated, lacking a necessary constant to ensure dimensional consistency. It is suggested that a constant with appropriate dimensions should be included to clarify the relationship between the variables. The discussion highlights a disconnect between mathematical formulation and physical application, particularly in educational contexts. Overall, the equation's presentation is deemed inadequate for proper dimensional analysis in physics.
dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
63
Hi
I've just done a question regarding a marble moving on a surface given by z = -1/(x2+y2)
In this case what happens with dimensional analysis ? x and y have dimensions of length while z has dimensions of 1/(length)2.
Is this question badly written or do i just accept that i won't be able to perform dimensional analysis on any later terms that are produced ?
Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
So if z is a distance, and x and y are distances, then there needs to be some implied dimension in the 1 in the numerator, to make the dimension of z be correct.

It's kind of like you can have y = x^2 mathematically, but if it represents something physical, then you might have to multiply by a coefficient (could be 1) with some dimension (or units).
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK and berkeman
dyn said:
HI
I've just done a question regarding a marble moving on a surface given by z = -1/(x2+y2)
In this case what happens with dimensional analysis ? x and y have dimensions of length while z has dimensions of 1/(length)2.
Is this question badly written or do i just accept that i won't be able to perform dimensional analysis on any later terms that are produced ?
Thanks
The question is badly formulated. There's some constant with the appropriate dimension missing. If it's in a math textbook it's simply that mathematicians nowadays don't care for correct physics. If it's a physics textbook it's simply a bad book ;-)).
 
  • Like
Likes dyn and scottdave
dyn said:
Is this question badly written or do i just accept that i won't be able to perform dimensional analysis on any later terms that are produced ?
It's a badly written question. But you can argue that the real surface is ##z'=Az##, where ##A## has dimensions of length cubed and equals one in whatever units you are using. At any point in your working you can simply substitute ##z'/A## for ##z## and check dimensions.
 
  • Like
Likes dyn
just an opinion but I think ##z=-1/(x^2+y^2)## is better written than ##z = -(1\ \mathrm{m^3})/(x^2 + y^2)## or ##(z/\mathrm{m}) = -1/((x/\mathrm{m})^2 + (y/\mathrm{m})^2)## or whatever because the emphasis is clearly on studying the properties of the surface and not confusing the student with weird dimensional factors
 
  • Like
Likes Office_Shredder
I'd simply write ##z=-A/(x^2+y^2)##, where ##A=\text{const}##. Of course, ##A## has the dimension ##\text{length}^3##. A dimensionally wrong equation is a nogo in any physics book!
 
  • Like
Likes dyn and scottdave
vanhees71 said:
The question is badly formulated. There's some constant with the appropriate dimension missing. If it's in a math textbook it's simply that mathematicians nowadays don't care for correct physics. If it's a physics textbook it's simply a bad book ;-)).
It was on a university maths exam paper !
 
Well, that explains it. Mathematicians don't care much for physics nowadays anymore :-(.
 
  • Like
Likes dyn

Similar threads

Back
Top