If a derivation leads to a result that is dimensionally incorrect,
then regardless of how that derivation was done, it is in error.
When enough has been said, there is no need to say more.
Rob Twiss
>Robert Twiss schrieb:
> > Seems to me a simple dimensional analysis shows the fallacy
> > of Koenemann's argument: The dimensions of f/A are [M][L][T^(-2)] /
> > [L^2] and of U/V are [M][L^2][T^(-2)] / [L^3], so the dimensions of
> > both quantities are the same: [M]/[L][T^2]. Thus both quantities
> > scale the same way with the dimension of the system, and Koenemann's
> > conclusion must be incorrect.
>
>Koenemann replied:
>The dimensions of a physical term do not tell you which function it follows.
>This we find from considering boundary conditions or other constraints; this
>discussion is very much about finding out which are the proper constraints.
>
>But if you wish to ignore the divergence theorem and potential theory - well,
>at the very least you could let me know why you do so; after all,
>this argument is not new to you. Silence is not an answer....
>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Robert J. Twiss email: [log in to unmask]
Geology Department telephone: (530) 752-1860
University of California at Davis FAX: (530) 752-0951
One Shields Ave.
Davis, CA 95616-8605, USA
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
|