The dimensions of evaporation are primarily represented as L/T, indicating length per time, which can be exemplified by measuring evaporation rates in mm/day. However, the discussion reveals that L can also represent various physical quantities related to evaporation, such as volume (L³) or mass flux, depending on the context. The ambiguity in the original question highlights the necessity for precise definitions when discussing physical processes like evaporation. Without specific references or clarifications from the original poster (OP), definitive answers remain elusive.
PREREQUISITESThis discussion is beneficial for hydrologists, environmental scientists, and students studying fluid dynamics or related fields, particularly those interested in the quantitative aspects of evaporation and its measurement.
If that is a metric for evaporation, then the dimensional notation would be L3/T.IanPTheAncient said:Liters/sec
Orodruin said:I do not see why we are debating this when it is clearly guesswork. There can be no reasonable answer unless the OP provides us with an appropriate link to the reference he is looking at. There are just too many possible interpretations of the OP.
There can be no right answer to the OP. Yes, L/T would be length/time, bit the OP has not specified what "evaporation" means - it is a physical process, not a physical quantity. There are many physical quantities related to evaporation (as demonstrated by your own post) that have different physical dimensions and it is impossible to know which is intended unless the OP specifies. It is like asking "what is the physical dimension of gravity?" It is impossible to know whether the answer should be in terms of the dimension of the gravitational constant (L^3/T^2 M), the gravitational force (ML/T^2), the gravitational acceleration (L/T^2), the gravitational source term (M), or something else.Lord Jestocost said:There is indeed no need for debating because @Doc Al is right.
Orodruin said:There can be no right answer to the OP.
No, you really cannot. I agree that this is one possible interpretation, but there are many other possible interpretations - as this thread has clearly demonstrated. What you are quoting is the flux. The OP could be interested in other physical quantities such as flow rate or mass flux. You simply do not know this without further specification on the part of the OP.Lord Jestocost said:The OP mentions hydrology and evaporation. From this you can conclude (with dimensions [L] for length and [T] for time): The volume of water (dimension [L3] ) per unit area (dimension [L2] ) per unit time (dimension [T] ): [L/T]