I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
parsonsb
301st Spartan (Overslept)
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:17 pm UTC

I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby parsonsb » Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:27 pm UTC

and replace it with hertz

instead of m/s you would have meterhertz or mHz for short

also we'd have to get rid of the millihertz, but thats really too slow to matter anyway

User avatar
Flying Betty
Posts: 1147
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:25 am UTC
Location: Next Tuesday

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Flying Betty » Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:52 pm UTC

I don't know, in your system it would take me about a millihertz to drive to the next city from where I live. That's hardly slow at all.
Belial wrote:The future is here, and it is cyberpunk as hell.

User avatar
Mathmagic
It's not as cool as that Criss Angel stuff.
Posts: 2926
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 12:48 am UTC
Location: In ur fora posting in teh threads

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Mathmagic » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:04 am UTC

Aaaand what is the reasoning behind this? :razz:

It doesn't make writing it out any easier (both two key/penstrokes)...
Axman: That, and have you played DX 10 games? It's like having your corneas swabbed with clits made out of morphine.
Pathway: cocks cocks cocks

ikerous
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:28 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby ikerous » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:06 am UTC

mathmagic wrote:Aaaand what is the reasoning behind this? :razz:

The transition would be painful for the less math inclined, which would be fairly amusing for the rest of us to watch?
Also, hertz is more fun to say.

User avatar
muteKi
Angry is too weak a term. Try "Fluffy".
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:02 am UTC
Location: William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby muteKi » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:08 am UTC

Since people in my experience tend to think of speed as the displacement that occurred during a unit of time I think that the typical m/s units work better.

Hz is more applicable to period motion, as a measure of frequency. Linear motion does not have a frequency.
Image

User avatar
Mathmagic
It's not as cool as that Criss Angel stuff.
Posts: 2926
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 12:48 am UTC
Location: In ur fora posting in teh threads

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Mathmagic » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:08 am UTC

ikerous wrote:
mathmagic wrote:Also, hertz is more fun to say.

It hertz my brain too much to make the transition. :D
Axman: That, and have you played DX 10 games? It's like having your corneas swabbed with clits made out of morphine.
Pathway: cocks cocks cocks

User avatar
parsonsb
301st Spartan (Overslept)
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:17 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby parsonsb » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:25 am UTC

i'd say it makes just as much sense as anything

hertz are equal to inverse seconds and meters * inverse seconds = m/s, you could still use hertz for frequency, and an advantage would be that meterhertz rolls off the tongue easier than m/s and looks more aesthetic

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:53 am UTC

parsonsb wrote:i'd say it makes just as much sense as anything

No, not really. It makes far more sense to measure things in units we can, well, measure. We can measure seconds directly, but not inverse seconds.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
parsonsb
301st Spartan (Overslept)
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:17 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby parsonsb » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:58 am UTC

well 10 m/s would become 10 meterhertz

imagine 9.8 meterhertz^2 as the acceleration due to gravity

c would be equal to 3*10^8 meterhertz

malarkie
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:21 am UTC
Location: Cloud 8

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby malarkie » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:05 am UTC

I like it. That is now how I will talk about speed.
SecondTalon wrote:
So long as it's sticky and goes well with a taco.

ikerous
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:28 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby ikerous » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:12 am UTC

So if V = dx/dt which is m/s would we need to use dxdt to get mHz? That doesn't sound like that would work...

User avatar
parsonsb
301st Spartan (Overslept)
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:17 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby parsonsb » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:19 am UTC

no because hertz = 1/s

so it'd still be dx/dt

User avatar
Govalant
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:50 am UTC
Location: Rosario, Argentina
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Govalant » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:20 am UTC

ikerous wrote:So if V = dx/dt which is m/s would we need to use dxdt to get mHz? That doesn't sound like that would work...



But time is measured in Hz-1, so I think i'd work.


Although I don't like the idea, mHz could be easily confused with MHz (meter hertz and mega hertz).


EDIT: damn it, you beated me to it.
Now these points of data make a beautiful line.

How's things?
-Entropy is winning.

ikerous
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:28 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby ikerous » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:23 am UTC

Aw. I think I was trying to eliminate s completely and use hZ as a unit for time. Where long times are short and short times are long... :|

Isn't mHz millihertz?
Last edited by ikerous on Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:26 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
parsonsb
301st Spartan (Overslept)
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:17 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby parsonsb » Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:23 am UTC

but if you're using MHz for mega hertz and mHz for meter hertz then its no different than using C for coulombs and c for speed of light

rflrob
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA, Terra, Sol
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby rflrob » Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:35 am UTC

I actually use Hz for cycles per second, and 1/s for radians per second... but nevertheless, I think I may try to do this for my next physics exam... For h it makes more sense to think of it as (Your favorite Energy unit)/Hz than Energy*s. Too bad hbar is much more common.
Ten is approximately infinity (It's very large)
Ten is approximately zero (It's very small)

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Solt » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:55 am UTC

If you do that you remove the implication that you are looking at rates. You can say "per second per second" or you can say "hertz hertz." Which of them is easier to understand? "per second" is an accurate description of what you are looking at, physically. You will always convert "hertz" to "per second" in your head anyway. When someone asks what hertz means, what will you say? "It means number of times per second." AND, for normal seconds, not inverse, you would be replacing "s" with "Hz-1". Inefficient! If anything, the Hertz unit should be abolished and replaced with "/s" since Hertz is redundant!

Rule number one of a good system: keep it simple and straightforward!
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,
produced a more reliable product. But sailors do
not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a
most annoying habit of splitting in two."
-J.W. Morris

User avatar
OneLess
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:10 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby OneLess » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:22 am UTC

parsonsb wrote:imagine 9.8 meterhertz^2 as the acceleration due to gravity

Except that the way you wrote it, it'd be a joule per kilogram:

(m/s)^2

which is why meter per second-squared works better.

Me no like arbitrary unit changes unless it helps me solve a real problem :evil:
“Observation: Couldn’t see a thing. Conclusion: Dinosaurs.” –Carl Sagan

Last edited by OneLess on Sat Dec 17, 3003 10:35 am, edited 0 time in total.

User avatar
ancient
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:34 pm UTC
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby ancient » Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:38 am UTC

I don't really like Hz as it has two letters; I believe units should only have one letter. Also, m.s-1 looks better than m/s and doubly so for m.s-2 and m/s/s. I realise people use m/s2 but this seems odd to me as you're mixing powers and slashes.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:42 am UTC

ancient wrote:but this seems odd to me as you're mixing powers and slashes.

So? You can't divide by the square of something?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

0SpinBoson
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:28 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby 0SpinBoson » Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:25 am UTC

My issue: "I'll be there in 3600 inverse Hertz." Don't even get me started on minutes/hours.

User avatar
Taejo
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:00 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Taejo » Mon Nov 05, 2007 8:40 am UTC

Yeah, we're going to need names for inverse minutes, hours and days.

Hertz, painz, achez and ???
Indiscreet Mathematics, a comic about maths

User avatar
Prole
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:14 pm UTC
Location: In your *noun* *verb*ing your *related noun*

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Prole » Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:54 am UTC

Conceptually it'd be a bitch.

Imagine trying to explain the units to a classroom

Disaster.
Image

Hit3k
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:12 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Hit3k » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:19 pm UTC

Taejo wrote:Yeah, we're going to need names for inverse minutes, hours and days.

Hertz, painz, achez and ???


owiez?

I'm all for this because, as ikerous said hertz is fun to say.
Sungura wrote:My mom made me watch a star wars. Two of them , actually. The Death Star one and the one where the dude ends up in the swamp with the weird guy who talks funny.

User avatar
thoughtfully
Posts: 2253
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:25 am UTC
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby thoughtfully » Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:02 pm UTC

Absolutely. I have those /s things. What I prefer is s-1.
Image
Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Solt » Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:22 am UTC

Taejo wrote:Yeah, we're going to need names for inverse minutes, hours and days.

Hertz, painz, achez and ???


Well we could go to a base ten system, so 10 (or 100) seconds in a minute, 10 minutes in an hour, x hours in a day. Then second would be "inverse hertz" minute would be "inverse DecaHertz" and hour would be "inverse HectaHertz", which are also fun to say.
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,

produced a more reliable product. But sailors do

not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a

most annoying habit of splitting in two."

-J.W. Morris

Tchebu
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:42 am UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Tchebu » Tue Nov 06, 2007 1:25 am UTC

The only reason 1 Hz is equal to 1/s is because Hertz are "oscilations/repetitions/revolutions per second", but oscilations, repetitions, revolutions ... hell, even radians (it pisses me to no end when teachers take off marks because I didn't put "rad/s" instead of "1/s" or "Hz" for angular frequency or something), are essencially all "nothings" (edit: or perhaps, more accurately put, "somethings"), which is why it doesn't get written. So... no, replacing seconds by inverse hertz would not be good, since it puts those "nothings" into a completely alien context.
Our universe is most certainly unique... it's the only one that string theory doesn't describe.

User avatar
ancient
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:34 pm UTC
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby ancient » Tue Nov 06, 2007 1:35 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
ancient wrote:but this seems odd to me as you're mixing powers and slashes.

So? You can't divide by the square of something?

Of course you can. I just don't think it looks good and it doesn't feel consistent to me.

hobbesmaster
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:11 pm UTC
Location: Lexington, Ky

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby hobbesmaster » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:42 am UTC

Tchebu wrote:The only reason 1 Hz is equal to 1/s is because Hertz are "oscilations/repetitions/revolutions per second", but oscilations, repetitions, revolutions ... hell, even radians (it pisses me to no end when teachers take off marks because I didn't put "rad/s" instead of "1/s" or "Hz" for angular frequency or something)\


Uhm, there is a difference of 2pi between rad/s and cycles/s... so yes, you should get marks taken off for not specifying what your answer is in (rad/s or Hz).

User avatar
Razzle Storm
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:17 am UTC
Location: Beijing, China
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Razzle Storm » Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:50 am UTC

parsonsb wrote:and replace it with hertz

instead of m/s you would have meterhertz or mHz for short

also we'd have to get rid of the millihertz, but thats really too slow to matter any


How about not?

rflrob
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA, Terra, Sol
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby rflrob » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:41 pm UTC

hobbesmaster wrote:
Tchebu wrote:The only reason 1 Hz is equal to 1/s is because Hertz are "oscilations/repetitions/revolutions per second", but oscilations, repetitions, revolutions ... hell, even radians (it pisses me to no end when teachers take off marks because I didn't put "rad/s" instead of "1/s" or "Hz" for angular frequency or something)\


Uhm, there is a difference of 2pi between rad/s and cycles/s... so yes, you should get marks taken off for not specifying what your answer is in (rad/s or Hz).


Somewhere in College Freshman physics (if not earlier), physicists stop really caring about specifying radians or cycles... Radians are fundamentally unitless (the length of an arc is s= r theta, and the units of radii and arclength are the same), so saying they have a unit of one is okay. Yeah, they differ by 2pi, but most of the time you just use the angular velocity, and by convention you assume that whoever is reading it is smart enough to figure that out.
Ten is approximately infinity (It's very large)
Ten is approximately zero (It's very small)

hobbesmaster
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:11 pm UTC
Location: Lexington, Ky

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby hobbesmaster » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:45 pm UTC

rflrob wrote:
hobbesmaster wrote:
Tchebu wrote:The only reason 1 Hz is equal to 1/s is because Hertz are "oscilations/repetitions/revolutions per second", but oscilations, repetitions, revolutions ... hell, even radians (it pisses me to no end when teachers take off marks because I didn't put "rad/s" instead of "1/s" or "Hz" for angular frequency or something)\


Uhm, there is a difference of 2pi between rad/s and cycles/s... so yes, you should get marks taken off for not specifying what your answer is in (rad/s or Hz).


Somewhere in College Freshman physics (if not earlier), physicists stop really caring about specifying radians or cycles...


Uhm, I hope they remember about that when they start looking at the EM spectrum.

Unakau
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 8:42 pm UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Unakau » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:11 am UTC

Hertz as a whole is difficult for the sole reason that by the time my class came out of High School Chemistry, I'm sure not one of us knew that Hertz were related to time in any way.

Ended
Posts: 1459
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:27 pm UTC
Location: The Tower of Flints. (Also known as: England.)

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Ended » Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:56 am UTC

Generally I try to make myself do things I instinctively avoid, in case they are awesome.
-dubsola

rflrob
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA, Terra, Sol
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby rflrob » Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:46 am UTC



It's a bizarre unit to be sure, but I find the multiplication by (ly^3/tsp) a little odd. I mean, you could just as easily have done ly * furlong * Angstrom/ tsp. Harder still would be to use something that never had any explicit time units, and have some whole collection of things that managed to get it down to 1/time.
Ten is approximately infinity (It's very large)
Ten is approximately zero (It's very small)

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby zenten » Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:09 pm UTC

rflrob wrote:


It's a bizarre unit to be sure, but I find the multiplication by (ly^3/tsp) a little odd. I mean, you could just as easily have done ly * furlong * Angstrom/ tsp. Harder still would be to use something that never had any explicit time units, and have some whole collection of things that managed to get it down to 1/time.


square root of ((furlongs * kilograms) / pound)?

User avatar
schrodingersduck
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:20 pm UTC
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Leodensia
Contact:

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby schrodingersduck » Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:36 pm UTC

Why not go one better and abolish the metre, to replace it with the dioptre-1? Then, everyone would have to go around measuring speeds in hertz per dioptre (hz.D-1), which is completely counter intuitive and nonsensical, and yet perfectly true from a dimensional analysis point of view.

Tchebu
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:42 am UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Tchebu » Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:11 am UTC

Uhm, there is a difference of 2pi between rad/s and cycles/s... so yes, you should get marks taken off for not specifying what your answer is in (rad/s or Hz)


There's a difference between stating frequency and angular frequency... yes... there is however no use whatsoever in saying that your phase has to be measured in radians instead being dimentionless...

Why the hell do we need to have w=f*2pi(rad), rather than just w=f*2pi?
Our universe is most certainly unique... it's the only one that string theory doesn't describe.

User avatar
LoopQuantumGravity
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:19 am UTC

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby LoopQuantumGravity » Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:51 am UTC

I think we should just measure things in planck units.
I study theoretical physics & strings, and am a recipient of the prestigious Jayne Cobb Hero of Canton award.

And the science gets done and you make a neat gun
For the people who are still alive!

User avatar
Mathmagic
It's not as cool as that Criss Angel stuff.
Posts: 2926
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 12:48 am UTC
Location: In ur fora posting in teh threads

Re: I propose the abolishment of the /s unit

Postby Mathmagic » Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:20 am UTC

Tchebu wrote:Why the hell do we need to have w=f*2pi(rad), rather than just w=f*2pi?

If you just said:

"The angular frequency is 2pi per second", that wouldn't mean anything. 2pi what? 2pi kiloradians/second? 2pi degrees/second? Angular frequency *does* have units. Despite the fact that radians in and of itself are not a unit, they give context to a value and indicate what you're talking about.
Axman: That, and have you played DX 10 games? It's like having your corneas swabbed with clits made out of morphine.
Pathway: cocks cocks cocks


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests