MHB Find an Equivalent Law for Dimensionless Quantities

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equivalent Law
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

A physical system is described by a law of the form $f(E,P,A)=0$ where $E,P,A$ represent, respectively, enery, pressure and area of surface. Find an equivalent law that relates suitable dimensionless quantities.

I have tried the following:

The fundamental units are:

Mass: $M$, Length: $L$, Time: $T$.

Thus:
$$[E]=ML^{2}T^{-2} \\ [P]=ML^{-1}T^{-2} \\ [A]=L^2$$

In this case, the number of fundamental units is equal to the number of the quantities with dimensions, so we cannot apply Buckingham $\pi$ theorem , right?

But how else can we find an equivalent law that relates suitable dimensionless quantities? (Thinking)

Or have I done something wrong at the choice of the fundamental units? :confused:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hey! (Blush)

Those units are correct and they are dependent on each other.
I think that means that we can still apply Buckingham's theorem.
Did you try? (Wondering)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top