Dimensionally impossible equation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Granger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Impossible
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of dimensionally impossible equations, specifically focusing on the equation v = e^bt, where b is a constant that makes bt dimensionless. Participants explore the implications of this equation regarding dimensional analysis and the nature of transcendental functions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that since bt is dimensionless, e^bt must also be dimensionless, leading to a contradiction with the left side of the equation, which has dimensions of length/time (LT^-1).
  • Others suggest that if the equation were expressed as v(t) = v0e^bt, it would clarify the need for e^bt to be dimensionless.
  • One participant mentions that transcendental functions like e^x cannot operate on units and are inherently dimensionless, except in specific cases involving inverse functions.
  • Another participant proposes that if b has dimensions of "1 over time," then bt becomes dimensionless, allowing v(t) to have the same units as x0.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of a constant in front of the equation, with some arguing that it should be 1 in appropriate units, while others contest this unless a specific system of natural units is defined.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the dimensionality of the right side of the equation and the implications of using transcendental functions. No consensus is reached on the interpretation of the equation or the necessity of constants in front of it.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding dimensional analysis in the context of transcendental functions and the potential for confusion when units are not explicitly stated.

Granger
Messages
165
Reaction score
7
I was reading some stuff about dimensionally impossible equations. It was said that the equation

v = e^bt (b is a constant so that bt is dimensionless)

was dimensionally impossible. I understand that BUT I don't understand what they said next about the dimension of the right-side. They said it was dimensionless, but I thought it had dimension T (like the left-side has dimension LT^-1)... Can someone explain me why I'm wrong? Thanks :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Granger said:
I was reading some stuff about dimensionally impossible equations. It was said that the equation

v = e^bt (b is a constant so that bt is dimensionless)

was dimensionally impossible. I understand that BUT I don't understand what they said next about the dimension of the right-side. They said it was dimensionless, but I thought it had dimension T (like the left-side has dimension LT^-1)... Can someone explain me why I'm wrong? Thanks :)
If that equation were written as v(t) = v0ebt then it would make more sense.

For that to make sense, ebt has to be dimensionless.
 
You said that ##bt## was dimensionless, so of course ##e^{bt}## is dimensionless also. But this is inconsistent with ##v(t)## having dimensions of length/time, so it is a "dimensionally impossible equation".

Generally speaking, transcendental functions like ##e^x##, ##\sin(x)##, ##\log(x)##, etc. can never operate on units and are always dimensionless. A small exception is when the inverse function appears in the same equation, like ##f(t) = e^{4 \log t}##. But it's unclear why you would ever write it this way rather than ##f(t)=t^4##.
 
Last edited:
Any such equation has a constant in front, in this case, the constant is 1, in appropriate units. for example, v = e^bt would mean: v = (1 m/s) e^bt, a particular case of the equation written by jbriggs 444 above
 
Khashishi said:
You said that ##bt## was dimensionless, so of course ##e^{bt}## is dimensionless also. But this is inconsistent with ##v(t)## having dimensions of length/time, so it is a "dimensionally impossible equation".
If b has dimensions of "1 over time", say, sec^{-1}, then bt is "dimensionless". Then ##v(t)= x_0e^{vt}## has whatever units ##x_0## does.

Generally speaking, transcendental functions like ##e^x##, ##\sin(x)##, ##\log(x)##, etc. can never operate on units and are always dimensionless. A small exception is when the inverse function appears in the same equation, like ##f(t) = e^{4 \log t}##. But it's unclear why you would ever write it this way rather than ##f(t)=t^4##.
 
Chandra Prayaga said:
Any such equation has a constant in front, in this case, the constant is 1, in appropriate units. for example, v = e^bt would mean: v = (1 m/s) e^bt, a particular case of the equation written by jbriggs 444 above
No, unless the text specifically states that a particular system of natural units are being used, such as atomic units. You would never see an equation like this with implied SI units.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
929
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K