[HN Gopher] Uno - The "Unit" for Dimensionless Quantities
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Uno - The "Unit" for Dimensionless Quantities
        
       Author : ColinWright
       Score  : 19 points
       Date   : 2021-07-01 10:34 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | crazygringo wrote:
       | > _In 2004, a report to the International Committee for Weights
       | and Measures (CIPM) stated that response to the proposal of the
       | uno "had been almost entirely negative", and the principal
       | proponent "recommended dropping the idea".[15] To date, the uno
       | has not been adopted by any standards organization, and it
       | appears unlikely that it will ever become an officially
       | sanctioned way to express low-value (high-ratio) dimensionless
       | quantities._
       | 
       | That sounds... about right, ha!
        
       | ggm wrote:
       | I'd have voted for burflydick or mumbledypeg or doohickey
       | 
       | A better reasoning for why SI needed a formalism of a unit for
       | dimensionless value would possibly have helped. Almost universal
       | negative dislike speaks to a committee on a mission without a
       | good sense of "do we need a reality check here"
       | 
       | c/f "brontosaur" and "pluto"
        
       | Synaesthesia wrote:
       | Interesting idea. We generally just say "unit" if necessary.
       | 
       | >In 2004, a report to the International Committee for Weights and
       | Measures (CIPM) stated that response to the proposal of the uno
       | "had been almost entirely negative", and the principal proponent
       | "recommended dropping the idea".[15] To date, the uno has not
       | been adopted by any standards organization, and it appears
       | unlikely that it will ever become an officially sanctioned way to
       | express low-value (high-ratio) dimensionless quantities. The
       | proposal was instructive, however, as to the perceived
       | shortcomings of the current options for denoting dimensionless
       | quantities.
        
       | lalaithion wrote:
       | The number 1 isn't the SI unit for dimensionless constants. The
       | SI unit for dimensionless constants is 602214076000000000000000.
       | 
       | No, "amount of something" or "number of atoms" is not a different
       | unit than dimensionless constants; that would be like if the SI
       | unit had "the amount of charge held by 10^30 electrons" as a
       | different unit than "charge".
        
         | minitoar wrote:
         | I don't get this. What do moles have to do with dimensionless
         | values?
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | It classes with Spanish on naming quantities, it feels wrong.
       | 
       | Name it "unitas", far better.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-01 23:00 UTC)