Why must exponents be dimensionless?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cocopops12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponents
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of why exponents must be dimensionless in mathematical expressions, particularly in the context of physics. Participants explore the implications of dimensionality in exponents and provide examples to illustrate their points.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why 'b' in the expression ab must be dimensionless, suggesting that mathematicians have defined various concepts but not this one.
  • Another participant clarifies that dimensions (e.g., meters, kilograms) are physical rather than mathematical objects, implying that the question may be better directed to physicists.
  • A participant discusses the mathematical series expansion of the exponential function, questioning the validity of the series if the variable x has dimensions, while noting that the exponent can contain variables with dimensions if they cancel out to yield a dimensionless number.
  • Another participant explains that when considering positive integer exponents, the exponent represents repeated multiplication, using the example of the volume of a cube to illustrate how the units are tied to the variable.
  • There are corrections regarding the notation used in the series expansion of the exponential function, with participants discussing the use of sigma notation.
  • A participant introduces the concept of matrix exponentials, suggesting that they are defined similarly to ordinary exponentials.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of dimensionless exponents, with some providing examples and others questioning the implications of dimensionality. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications of dimensionality in exponents.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific mathematical expressions and their properties, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the treatment of dimensions in various contexts.

cocopops12
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
suppose we have ab
why must 'b' be dimensionless?

Mathematicians have defined crazy things over the centuries
so why haven't they defined this one?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"Dimensions", in the sense that you are using the word (meters, kilograms, degrees celsius) are not mathematical objects, they are physical. If you are asking why no physics formula, with exponents, has no units on the exponent, you will have to ask a physicist.
 
I see, thank you sir.
 
cocopops12 said:
I see, thank you sir.

If x is a variable then you do something like:

$$e^x=\sum_n \frac{x^n}{n!}=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!}+...$$

Now does that sum make sense if x has a dimension?

However the exponent can contain variables with dimensions but they must cancel to give a dimensionless number:

eg. $$M(t)=M_oe^{-\lambda t}$$
 
Last edited:
cocopops12 said:
suppose we have ab
why must 'b' be dimensionless?
If we restrict our attention to exponents that are positive integers, then an exponent means repeated multiplication. For example, x2 = x * x, and x3 = x * x * x.

The volume of a cube whose edge length is s is V = s3 = s * s * s. The units are tied to the variable s. All the exponent does is keep track of how many factors of s are present.
 
trollcast said:
$$e^x=\sigma_n \frac{x^n}{n!}=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!}+...$$

I think you meant $$e^x=\sum_n \frac{x^n}{n!}=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!}+...$$

\Sigma works, though \sum tends to work a little better.
 
Whovian said:
I think you meant $$e^x=\sum_n \frac{x^n}{n!}=1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!}+...$$

\Sigma works, though \sum tends to work a little better.

Oops, good trick with the \sum, I always wondered how to get the sigma bigger.

Fixed it now
 
There are matrix exponentials for a given matrix X of nxn dimensions defined similarly to the ordinary exponential of a number.

eX = \sum^{∞}_{k=0} \frac{1}{k!} Xk
 
trollcast said:
Oops, good trick with the \sum, I always wondered how to get the sigma bigger.

Fixed it now
Greek letters have upper and lower case forms: sigma is lowercase (##\sigma##) and
Sigma is uppercase (##\Sigma##).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K