Universal? or Multiple Units of Measure?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the practicality of using a universal unit of measure versus multiple units for different scales, including both macro and particle levels. It highlights the preference in the physics community for a consistent set of units, specifically the International System of Units (SI). The SI system is designed to provide clarity and prevent inaccuracies in measurements. The conversation suggests that while a universal unit may seem appealing, the established SI framework is favored for its consistency and reliability. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards maintaining a standardized system to ensure accurate representation across various measurements.
Lobos
Messages
11
Reaction score
2
Firstly, I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm not using the right wording or just plain incorrect with my approach.

Is it practical to suggest that units of one measurement system could possibly represent the measurement of things not only at the macro level, but represent particles with and without mass? Or is it best to create multiple units of measure to prevent inaccuracies/misrepresentation?

In short, what would be better, a universal unit of measure or a bunch of different units of measure?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, the physics world at general like to have a small set of internally consistent units. The agreed-upon system is called the International System of Units (abbreviated SI). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units
260px-SI_base_unit.svg.png

The seven basic units
 
  • Like
Likes Lobos
Svein said:
Well, the physics world at general like to have a small set of internally consistent units. The agreed-upon system is called the International System of Units (abbreviated SI). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units
260px-SI_base_unit.svg.png

The seven basic units

Thank you so much. This helps a lot.
 

Thread 'Non-orthogonal bases'

Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
View full post »

Thread 'What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I History of the Universe and measured outcomes
Replies
12
Views
2K
I Karatsuba multiplication implementation question
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Can the "measurement problem" just be an "epistemological ambiguity"?
Replies
15
Views
2K
I How do the collider experiments measure the mass of the W boson?
Replies
4
Views
4K
I A Bold New Take on Quantum Theory
Replies
25
Views
5K
I When should we take numerology seriously?
Replies
19
Views
6K
I Progress In Calculating The HLbL Contribution To Muon g-2
Replies
0
Views
2K
What is the Mass–energy equivalence
Replies
1
Views
5K
B Questions about recent paper on Entangled Histories
Replies
15
Views
4K
Loop Quantum Gravity and the Concept of the Universe as a Co
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top