RVHG wrote:

[How can you conciliate an alpha being the probability of an electron
to emit or absorb a photon with your view of an alpha being anything?]

That is not my view. Note that this lie contradicts your
previous lie completely, that I said that \alpha is ONLY a
number. Instead of working at being a better liar, you should
reevaluate the horse**** physics that you propose.

Multiplying a non-number (2 cows) by a number (3) and obtaining a
non-number (6 cows) has the same problem

Go and learn something about set theory. Draw some cows on a
blackboard and encircle two different ones three times. Come
back when you have reached at very least an intermediate high
school level of understanding.

The c=1 dimensionless assignment is not a
thing that men have the right to make

I have already shown in detail that you are wrong. Physicists
can and do have right to make c=k dimensionless, for all positive
real k. No inconsistencies are introduced by doing so.


---Tim Shuba---

Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
: Multiplying a non-number (2 cows) by a number (3) and obtaining a
: non-number (6 cows) has the same problem as the division of a
: non-number (6 cows) by a non-number (2 cows) obtaining a number (3).

If you buy 3 cartons of eggs, and each carton has 12 eggs, how
many eggs did you buy? Are you claiming that this problem
cannot be solved mathematically?

Stephen

wrote in message ...
Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
: Multiplying a non-number (2 cows) by a number (3) and obtaining a
: non-number (6 cows) has the same problem as the division of a
: non-number (6 cows) by a non-number (2 cows) obtaining a number (3).

If you buy 3 cartons of eggs, and each carton has 12 eggs, how
many eggs did you buy? Are you claiming that this problem
cannot be solved mathematically?

Stephen
Of course not. Don't take this out of context. This is part of a long
discussion about the physical meaning of dimensions in unit systems.
Instead of "cows" you must put "meter","second" or any other
dimensionful unit for a physical magnitude. We all learned in school
that you can handle "dimensions" as if they were pure numbers,
dividing per example "meter" by "second" writing "meter/second", or
"meter/meter=1 (dimensionless)". We are discussing about the physical
meaning behind those procedures. If you compare 600 cm with 100 cm as
your desired unit to make a measurement, the result is 6 meter. But if
you divide 600cm by 100cm the result is the pure number 6. Then, if
the last division is not a measurement, what is it? The physical
meaning of dimensionless numbers is the topic here.
If you want to participate in this discussion I recommend you to read
it from the beginning (sorry, it is a little long!).

RVHG