Physical quantity

Is there really a distinction between a physical quantity and a non-physical quantity? Judging from the definition of physical quantity, there isn’t. “Physical” means “belonging or owned by the profession of physics.” If a quantity exists in the legal physics code, it is called a physical quantity. It is implied that only what belongs to physics is “natural” because physics = nature. And it goes without saying that nature = Newtonian.

Let’s look at an example from Wikipedia. Power is a physical quantity:

P = 42.3\times 10^3 \ \textrm{W}

  • P is the physical quantity of power
  • 42.3 * 103 is the numerical value of {P}
  • W is the symbol for the unit of power [P], the Watt.

A physical quantity is defined as a number multiplied by a unit. This definition says nothing about the physicallness of the physical quantity. It only says that if you define a unit and multiply it by a number then the resulting quantity is a physical quantity. Let’s define the physical quantity of power in terms of the unit of authority, W = the Wig. We’ll obtain the same result for power P

P = 42.3\times 10^3 \ \textrm{W}

  • P is the physical quantity of power
  • 42.3 * 103 is the numerical value of {P}
  • W is the symbol for the unit of power [P], the Wig.

Indeed, a person with more authority is more powerful than another person with less authority.

The definition of “physical quantity” makes sense because we are living in a definitional world, not in an absolute world with discontinuities. This also supports the density continuum view, e.g., software and steel are equally “matter,” they happen to have different densities. This result follows directly from the denial of the Newtonian atomic materialism.

Physics itself, in theory, is sensibly based on a definition that allows a natural description of nature by definitions:

Q=\{Q\}\times [Q]

What makes physics a scholastic and authoritarian profession and therefore the anti-science is the fact that physicists defined physical to be only what is included in their professional code called physics. So, in practice, physicists really use another definition of physical quantity:

Q=\{Q\}\times [Q_\textrm{legal}]

According to this definition only quantities expressed by an official and legal physics unit is considered a physical quantity. ((This makes sense because the scholastic corporation defines standards and sells them to engineers, governments and the media.)) This is how physicists assert the ownership of scientific concepts that for generations lived independent of physics and its doctrines.

If we uphold the original definition of physical quantity we must conclude that there is no physical/non-physical duality. There is only legal/non-legal duality enforced by physics professionals who defined non-legal to be unphysical. ((All professionals find in themselves the right to enforce their definition of legal as the only truth to protect their monopoly. Physics is no different.))

If physicists’ definition of the physical quantity is true, then we must believe in a definitional nature: The standard is the unit. Or the standard is the thing. If it has a unit it exists. No one owns nature. It’s yours and mine. Nature doesn’t belong to a professional class.

About these ads

5 thoughts on “Physical quantity

  1. Pingback: Data types of F=ma at Freedom of Science

  2. Pingback: Fundamental constants of physics at Freedom of Science

  3. Pingback: Physics and metaphysics at Freedom of Science

  4. Pingback: Axioms, algorithms and scientific revolutions at Freedom of Science

  5. Pingback: 000-Force Physical Quantity « Force

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s