Talk:Homogeneity (physics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

A valid equation in physics must be homogeneous.


ms^-1 = m / s (converted to base units) ms^-1 = ms^-1 (rearranged) The LHS of the equation = the RHS. Thus, it is homogeneous.

However, if the equation is homogeneous, it doesn't necessarily mean the equation will be true. eg Volume of a sphere = (pi)r^3 This equation is homogenous, but we know that it isn't true, as it is missing the 4/3 before the (pi). I doubt if an equation being dimensionally consistent or not has anything to do with homogenity. Please confirm

[edit] Merging with "Invariant (physics)"

Merging this article with "Invariant (physics)" has been proposed. I think there is some potential for a full article on the general subject. But I would hope to also keep this page, to simply define the word for quick reference from physics topics that use it. I intend to reference it for that purpose in upcoming writings. -- Chris Mid 20:41, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] big cleanup

I just made a big cleanup.

I think the article is now readable and useful, yet still a stub. Both issues need to be developed (in separate sections). But I think the { { merge...}} tag could be removed now. — MFH:Talk 15:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing

this article is unreadable to a lay person such as my self. When giving examples to try and explain a concept it is better to give examples simpler then the thing trying to be explained, IMHO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.120.227.160 (talk • contribs)

I split it up in 2 bigger parts for each of the meanings, and tried to add some more explanations and links. — MFH:Talk 22:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)