I agree. I believe science but I seriously think the BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) is wrong. They made SI bad by glossing over the necessary base unit of angle, there should be 8 base dimension, not 7.
I strongly disagree with the definition itself. And yes, there are stops that prevent me from doing that in scientific computing resources like sympy, matlab, and my professors.
yep, I don’t think the question “what’s the cos of a unit” is valid because cos expects a plane angle in the input and a unit doesn’t meet that expectation; it’s underdefined; it depends whether the calculator is set to radians or degrees.
I agree. I believe science but I seriously think the BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) is wrong. They made SI bad by glossing over the necessary base unit of angle, there should be 8 base dimension, not 7.
Except it’s not a unit, it’s a unitless ratio. You’d have one for every number of dimension. The mol is arguably the extra one.
I seriously disagree with you, your you’re wrong.
here’s an article which supports my reasoning https://arxiv.org/pdf/2108.05704
No one stops you from putting radians and steradians in your units. But it’s unitless by definition.
I strongly disagree with the definition itself. And yes, there are stops that prevent me from doing that in scientific computing resources like sympy, matlab, and my professors.
You disagree that a ratio is unitless? What’s the cos of a unit?
yep, I don’t think the question “what’s the cos of a unit” is valid because cos expects a plane angle in the input and a unit doesn’t meet that expectation; it’s underdefined; it depends whether the calculator is set to radians or degrees.