Physics Today
Jump to Content
Increase text size Decrease text size
  • Sign In
  • View Items in Cart View Cart
  • Advanced
  • Keyword
 
  • Home
  • Print Edition
  • Daily Edition
    • News Picks
    • The Dayside
    • Physics Update
    • Singularities
    • Points of View
    • Politics and Policy
    • Science and the Media
    • Obituaries
    • We Hear That
    • Events Calendar
  • Advertising
  • Buyer's Guide
  • About us
    • Our mission
    • Our people
    • American Institute of Physics
    • Member societies
    • Register
    • Subscribe
    • Submit content
    • Marketing reprints
    • Rights and permissions
    • Help/FAQ
    • Change mailing address
    • Contact us
  • Jobs
    • Job Seeker Login
    • Search Jobs
    • Post Resumes
    • Career Resources
    • For Employers
    • Success Stories
    • Resume Templates
    • About Us
    • Advertising
    • Display Advertising
    • Employer Resources
    • Banner Advertising
    • Security Tips
Follow us: Facebook    Twitter    rss    E-mail alert
  • Table of contents
  • Past issues

yellow star Featured Jobs

  • Search jobs
  • Post jobs
letters

A Proposal for Rescaling Units

October 2001 page 12

Several physical quantities are thought of as having "obvious" upper or lower bounds in their magnitudes. Temperature, for example, cannot go below absolute zero, the magnitude of any velocity is at most c, the speed of light, and time cannot go back past the Big Bang.

In life outside the laboratory, we never get very close to any of these bounds, so they pose no problem. However, researchers in cryogenics, cosmology, and high-energy physics work at values that are perceived to be close to these limits. We read of temperatures one one-hundredth of a degree above absolute zero (that is, 0.01 K); of velocities at 99.95% of the speed of light; and of the state of the cosmos at 10-8 seconds after the Big Bang. In these cases, the standard system of units is inconvenient. Getting three orders of magnitude closer to 0 K, or to the time of the Big Bang, or to the speed of light, should not be obscured by the appearance that the change is merely an infinitesimal improvement.

A change of units that maps zero to minus infinity and, in the case of velocity, maps c to plus infinity makes it easier to appreciate improvements that get closer to these bounds by orders of magnitude. This principle has been in use for a long time by engineers who measure changes in intensity in decibels (dB), where an increase or decrease by n orders of magnitude is a change of +10n dB or -10n dB, respectively.

For physical quantities like time and temperature, the new units may simply be taken as the common logarithms of the old units. Using T to represent the new unit of temperature, we set 1 K = 0 T with (10n) K = n T for negative as well as positive values for n. Thus, 0.01 K = -2 T. More generally, x K = (log10x) T, for any positive real number x. A similar approach applies to time since the Big Bang, where "x seconds after the Big Bang" becomes (log10x) U, where U is our new, logarithmic measure of time.

For velocity magnitudes v, with 0 ≤ v ≤ c, we can rescale to V= tan(πv/2c), with 0 ≤ V ≤ +∞. At v = ½c, this gives V= tan(π/4) = 1.

For nanotechnology researchers, the lower limit of zero for weight, length, and so forth can be moved to minus infinity by the same logarithmic technique used above for time and temperature. Names and symbols for these new units should be recommended by appropriate standards committees for each of the research areas involved.

Solomon W. Golomb
University of Southern California
Los Angeles
  • Article Tools
  • Enlarge text   Enlarge text
  • Shrink text   Shrink text
  • Comment on this articleWrite a letter to the editor
  • Free this month
  • Physics and Archaeology
  • The Little Machines That are Making it Big
  • Physicist Arrested in Iran
  • After-Dinner Physics
  • New Books
  • Letters
  • Most popular articles
  • Gedanken experiment: Levitate a physics sitcom?
    Points of View
  • Nanoplasmonics: The physics behind the applications
    February 2011
  • Half-quantum vortices
    Physics Update
  • Quantum criticality
    February 2011

 



SERVICES
Physics Today Jobs
Physics Today Buyers Guide
Event Calendar
Obituaries
DAILY EDITION
The Dayside
News Picks
Science in the Media
Politics & Policy
Singularities
Physics Update
Points of View
THE MAGAZINE
This month in print
Institutional subscriptions
Information for advertisers
READER SERVICE
Register
Sign in
Subscribe
Email alert
MORE INFO
FAQ
Contact us
About Physics Today
Privacy Policy
Marketing reprints
Rights and Permissions

Copyright © by the American Institute of Physics - All rights reserved

Find articles by AUTHORNAME

This PublicationThis Publication
ScitationScitation
SPINSPIN
ScitopiaScitopia
Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
PubMedPubMed