TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Has the time come for a physics notation standard?

20 点作者 another超过 10 年前

3 条评论

oddthink超过 10 年前
I doubt it, to be honest. In my experience, universities are locally consistent: the E&amp;M class isn&#x27;t going to contradict quantum, at least by much. And once you&#x27;re out of undergrad, it&#x27;s pretty easy to figure out what&#x27;s going on, given the context.<p>If we try to standardize, we&#x27;ll end up with some awful compromise position that no one likes. For example, I still dislike the push for MKS units where CGS would work much better, such as E&amp;M, plasma physics, and much of astrophysics.
esharte超过 10 年前
As an undergraduate I sit in classes being taught to use meaningful variables in code. Then I walk into one of the many math and physics lectures and wonder what meaningless single letter variables are we see scribbled on the whiteboard today.<p>This wouldn&#x27;t be so bad if I didn&#x27;t have a class with a different lecturer using different notation afterwards.<p>Should each lecturer introduce their notation the first time its used in class?<p>Why can&#x27;t they just use use proper meaningful variable names?
评论 #8833266 未加载
jkmcf超过 10 年前
Proper (?) writing style says the first time you introduce an acronym, such as the dreaded Three Letter Acronym (TLA), you write out the acronym the first time you use it and put the abbreviation in parentheses.<p>It makes sense to do this for notation in all fields where the reader might become confused. I&#x27;m not sure a standard is needed, maybe only a movement of reviewers rejecting papers containing the vagaries.
评论 #8833335 未加载