Talk:Benchmark quantities

From Citizendium
(Redirected from Talk:Benchmark Quantities)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A (physical) quantity is a numerically quantified property of an object in terms of some appropriate physical units, such as meters for length or kilograms for mass. A benchmark quantity, for the purposes of this article, is a reference against which quantities for other objects can be compared. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Physics [Please add or review categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

Creating the talk page.Mark Widmer (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Lower-case q?

Lower-case q? Peter Jackson (talk) 10:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
I would be fine with making q lower-case, especially if that is standard Citizendium format. Mark Widmer (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Planned additional sections

This page is a work in progress, and the following benchmark units are planned or proposed.Mark Widmer (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Acceleration
Power
Force
Pressure
Electric charge
Voltage
Electric field
Coefficient of thermal expansion
Money/currency? Really not a physics topic, so arguably doesn't belong here. But could be useful, if not here then maybe in a new page of non-physics benchmarks?

Alphabetize the sections?

It might be useful to sort the sections into alpabetic order, though I am unsure how you would sort a section with multiple names, such as Angular or rotational speed. Pat Palmer (talk) 05:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Good idea, I have alphabetized the sections. Mark Widmer (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Style/guidelines/scope for article

In creating this article, I had in mind a page that's layperson-friendly, while maintaining accuracy as a useful reference. With that in mind, and trying to keep a consistent style through the article, I've been trying to follow the following guidelines Mark Widmer (talk) 02:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Give most values as 1 or 2 significant figures, while quantities that are considered definitions might go to 3 sig figs.
That being said, I'm still mulling over using 3 sig figs for densities of elements.
For very large or very small numbers, use both
scientific notion -- for it's compactness and making it easy to compare widely different numbers -- and
common language like "30 billion" or "30 billionths" -- because it's more likely to be understood by laypeople -- while
not writing numbers as, e.g. "30,000,000,000" or "0.00000003" -- because I've never been fond of having to count a bunch of zeroes.
Stay away from obscure quantities that only experts might be familiar with, such as:
The fine structure constant
"Planck values", e.g. Planck length, Planck time, Planck mass, etc. (I had included some of these initially, but have since deleted them as not being layperson-friendly.)
Properties of quarks, neutrinos, and any subatomic particles other than electrons, protons, and neutrons. (Note, Dark matter is mentioned in the Density section. While not something that is read about every day, dark matter does get mentioned fairly often in popular articles on astronomy.)
A standard format for the text preceding each table has been adopted. The text is organized into 3 parts as follows (Mark Widmer (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2020 (UTC))
An introductory or explanatory statement
Units used for the quantity -- list the SI unit first, then give alternative units
A quick scale, giving several representative objects covering a wide range of values for the quantity.
For the "Quick scale" paragraphs, use reference objects that people are either familiar with (The Sun and Earth, a typical person, an FM radio signal, air) or have likely heard about frequently (a hydrogen atom, the speed of light).
The above guidelines are of course open to discussion.