The Newton-meter issue and the dimension 1 issue come up repeatedly.
Someone was claiming that UCUM contradicts the VIM when UCUM says that
100% = 100%. I do not see the contradiction. I don't recall VIM
making any arguments about dimensionless quantities and their units
somehow preserving a difference. (01)
May be we should proceed by putting certain simple questions up for
discussion. Such as whether 1 = 1 :) (02)
Clearly it is known that the unit does not preserve the full detail of
the quantity. And attempts to make unit concepts that preserve such
a difference are futile. A Newton-meter is a Newton-meter and 1 is 1.
Equality in quantity value expressions do not imply equality in
quantities. (03)
BTW, there may be some inconsistencies between UCUM and VIM/SI, and
those are not significantly changing the practical behavior of the
system and are there for various convictions. But they are all up
for negotiation once the time comes to negotiate harmonization. (04)
regards,
-Gunther (05)
ravi sharma wrote:
> Well put, let us focus on the objective.
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Weber, Martin S. <martin.weber@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:martin.weber@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> > Pat Hayes:
> > Um... as I recall from the telecon presentation, UCUM treats angle as
> > a physical dimension, so this entire debate is beside the point. There
> > is a *unit* distinction between angle and count; angle is not
> > dimensionless in UCUM. Very sensible move.
>
> Uh well, reading the semantics of UCUM IIUC angle and count are
> different units but they are not different dimensions. About them
> being different units and thus the debate being beside the point:
> Don't be so difficult :D If you prefer it, then let's talk about
> newton-meter
> vs. newton-meter. Oh. Am I talking about two different things here?
> Do I need a (kind of, +) quantity here? When you're done redefining
> physics, metrology, and the VIM, reknitted the SI, abolished some
> units of measure in use, and introduced others, ... someone
> will tell me whether I'm talking about torque or something different.
>
> I'm sorry guys, but sometimes I get the impression you wanna tackle
> the world and not creating a standard ontology for units of measure
> and their necessary related concepts. Do you expect all the users of
> the ontology understand all of the underlying concepts?
>
> Regards,
>
> -Martin
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
> Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Config/Unsubscribe:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks.
> Ravi
> (Dr. Ravi Sharma)
> 313 204 1740 Mobile
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
> Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Config/Unsubscribe:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
> (06)
--
Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D. gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Associate Professor Indiana University School of Informatics
Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indiana University School of Medicine
tel:1(317)423-5521 http://aurora.regenstrief.org (07)
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this message and any files
transmitted with it may contain confidential and/or privileged
information and are intended solely for the use of the named
addressee(s). Additionally, the information contained herein may have
been disclosed to you from medical records with confidentiality
protected by federal and state laws. Federal regulations and State
laws prohibit you from making further disclosure of such information
without the specific written consent of the person to whom the
information pertains or as otherwise permitted by such regulations. A
general authorization for the release of medical or other information
is not sufficient for this purpose. If you have received this message
in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the
original message. Any retention, disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is
strictly prohibited. (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard (09)
|