uom-ontology-std
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?

To: "uom-ontology-std" <uom-ontology-std@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "ingvar_johansson" <ingvar.johansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:08:36 +0200 (CEST)
Message-id: <63971.83.254.150.253.1254305316.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear all,    (01)

Here are some answers and comments to some parts of some of yesterday�s
mails (taken in temporal order)
---
Gunther S: �Nowhere in my practical experience of working with units in
the sciences do I ever see a qualification of units.�    (02)

IJ-answer: I firmly believe you, but I think this absence of
qualifications is due to the fact that in each practical case the context
automatically creates a qualification as background knowledge. But general
metrology can have no such pre-given context qualifications.
---    (03)

Joe C: �I would not agree that "many units are unambiguously tied only to
one kind-of-quantity".�    (04)

IJ-answer: Depends on what we mean by �many�. Surely, all the six base
property quantities of the SI are (but not �amount of substance�).
---    (05)

Matthew W: �Could you give me a unit (or two) that you think only applies
to one kind-of-quantity, and I'll see if I can identify another?    (06)

IJ-answer: m (length), kg (mass), and t (duration).
---    (07)

Gunther S (to Pat H): �so we agree that 1 N.m = 1 N.m when we talk about
units and there is no such thing as "N.m moment of force" as a unit? 
There is of course the Quantity moment of force 1 N.m, but the unit is
still N.m without knowing anything about torque vs. energy.�    (08)

IJ-comment: Every real unit presupposes a scale for a kind-of-quantity; a
unit with no reference at all to a scale or quantity is meaningless. What
I have proposed to call a �nominal unit�, is a unit that necessarily
refers to other units, i.e., to real units with scales for
kinds-of-quantities.
---    (09)

Gunther S: �The VIM speaks about Quantities and measurement and a little
bit about Units. The SI speaks a lot about Units. I don't think that
either one argues that Units contain the detail of the Quantities.�    (010)

IJ-comment: I think  you are wrong. VIM�s definition 1.9 says: measurement
unit = real scalar quantity, defined and adopted by convention, with which
any OTHER QUANTITY OF THE SAME KIND CAN BE COMPARED. Definition 1.10 says:
base unit = measurement unit that is adopted by convention FOR A BASE
QUANTITY. The SI brochure says (p. 103): The terms quantity and unit are
defined in VIM. That is (at least in my interpretation), both VIM and the
SI are stating the view that �Units presuppose the detail of the
Quantities�. Or in my words, once again: every real unit presupposes a
scale for a kind-of-quantity.
---    (011)

Best,
Ingvar    (012)




_________________________________________________________________
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    (013)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>