Find the square root of a quantity in what unit

AI Thread Summary
When taking the square root of a physical quantity, the resulting unit is the square root of the original unit, such as √kg. The discussion explores the relationship between time and mass, suggesting that time may be proportional to the square root of mass, though this raises questions about the meaning of the gradient in such a relationship. Clarification is provided that while mathematical operations can be performed, they must also make physical sense, especially when defining dependent and independent variables. The importance of ensuring consistent units in equations is emphasized, as constants must adjust units appropriately for the relationships to hold true. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the need for careful consideration of units and their implications in physical equations.
Physique
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey all,

this is my first post here, I have just discovered the site, and it looks great :smile:

I need some help on units, regarding square roots.

When you find the reciprocal of a quantity, like say, mass, the new unit is kg-1.

I'm not sure about when you find the square root of a quantity, what unit would it be?

Regards,
Physique.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
When you take the square root of a physical quantity you get the square root of the units as well.
 
Thanks Tide!

I'm investigating the relationship between time and mass, and I think I've got it, time is proportional to the square root of mass, but what on Earth does the gradient mean?

time is on the y-axis, square root of mass is on the x-axis
 
"Gradient" generally refers to (rate of) change with respect to spatial position. If you could provide more detail on the problem you are trying to solve then we could offer more clarification.
 
How did you arrive at the idea that "time is proportional to the square root of mass"? I imagine that you have some formula in which something, say a raindrop, is accumulating mass as it falls. In that case, I would be more inclined to say "mass is proportional to the square of time". In order for that to make any sense, your constant of proportionality would have to "fix" the units:
For example, if we have m= ct2, mass is measured in kg and time in seconds, then we have kg= c*sec2 so c must have units of kg/sec2 in order to "cancel" the sec2 and introduce kg into the formula.
Yes, you could also write t= c\sqrt{m} in which case c must have units of \frac{sec}{\sqrt{kg}}. While mathematics does not deal in "cause and effect", physics does. As soon as you introduce "mass" and "time", it makes more sense to me to think of time as the independent variable and mass as the dependent variable!

Notice that just because you can do a mathematical operation doesn't mean it will make physical sense! If A= x2, where A is the area of a square of side length x, then x= \sqrt{A}. Now, there, of course, A would have to be measured in something like "square inches" or "square meters" and, of course, x= \sqrt{A} would me measured in "inches" or "meters". That's why, in formulas, we typically write "square meters" as "m2" or "square inches" as in2.

On the other hand, I would not expect to have any physical quantity with units of \sqrt{m} or \sqrt{kg}. In the examples above, your constants (which may not be "physical" quantities) had to change the units appropriately
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Back
Top