The Gravitational Constant and the Planck's Units A

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Gravitational Constant and the Planck's Units A The Gravitational Constant and the Planck’s Units A Simplification of the Quantum Realm⇤ Espen Gaarder Haug† Norwegian University of Life Sciences (Dated: Preprint where final version published Physics Essays 2016) Abstract: In this paper, I suggest a new way to write the gravitational constant that makes all of the Planck units: Planck length, Planck time, Planck mass, and Planck energy more intuitive and simpler to understand. By writing the gravitational constant in a Planck functional form, we can rewrite all of the Planck units (without changing their values). Hopefully this can be a small step on the way to a better understanding of the quantum realm. R´esum´e: Dans cet article, je propose une nouvelle faon d’´ecrire la constante gravitationnelle qui rend toutes les unit´es de Planck, la longueur de Planck, le temps de Planck, la masse de Planck, et l’´energie de Planck, plus intuitives et plus simples comprendre. En crivant la constante gravitationnelle sous une forme fonctionnelle de Planck, nous pouvons r´e´ecrire toutes les unit´es de Planck (sans changer leur valeur). Nous esp´erons que cela puisse tre un petit pas vers une comprhension encore meilleure du domaine quantique. Key words: Gravitational constant, Max Planck, Planck units: length, time, mass, energy, quan- tum physics. I. A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON THE PLANCK UNITS Next the Planck mass in this context results in We suggest that Newton’s gravitational constant[1] can be written as a function of Planck’s reduced constant ~c ~c ~ 1 mp = = 2 3 = (4) G lpc l c 2 3 s p s p lpc ~ Gp = (1) ~ Based on the gravitational constant, the Planck energy where ~ is the reduced Planck’s constant [2], c is the can be simplified to well tested round-trip speed of light, and lp is the Planck length [3]. We could call this Planck’s form of the grav- itational constant. The Planck length lp is calibrated so 2 ~c 2 ~ 1 2 ~ Ep = mpc = c = c = c (5) that Gp matches our best estimate for the gravitational sGp lp c lp constant. We can use the gravitational constant to find the Planck length, or the Planck length to set the grav- And finally we can also rewrite the reduced Compton itational constant. In our view, the Planck form of the wavelength: gravitational constant enables us to rewrite Planck’s con- stants in a way that simplifies and gives deeper insight, potentially opening up the path for new interpretations ~ ~ 1 = 1 = 1 = lp (6) mpc ~ c in physics. lp c lp Based on this, the Planck length is given by I summarize a series of rewritten Planck units in Table 1. l2 c3 G p One interesting thing to note from the table is that in ~ p ~ ~ lp = = = lp (2) the Planck form of the Planck units, one has c1.5, c2.5, c3 s c3 r c3.5 and c4.5 as well as c4, c5, c7, c8 and it is very hard to Here the Planck length is simply our constant lp.Fur- find any intuition in c powered to such numbers. In the ther, the Planck time in this context is rewritten forms introduced in this paper, we only have c in most of the units, and c2 for only the Planck power and Planck intensity. We have gotten rid of the square 2 3 lpc root as well as the high-powered, non-intuitive notation ~Gp ~ lp t = = ~ = (3) in the Planck units. p 5 s 5 One could arguer thatc rewritingc the gravitationalc con- stant in this way creates a circular argument, since the 2 TABLE I. The table shows the standard Planck units and the units rewritten in the simpler and more intuitive form. Units: “Normal”-form: Simplified-form: 2 3 11 lpc Gravitational constant G 6.67408 10− Gp = ⇡ ⇥ ~ ~G Planck length lp = c3 lp = lp q ~G lp Planck time tp = c5 tp = c q ~c ~ 1 Planck mass mp = mp = G lp c q~c5 ~ Planck energy Ep = Ep = c G lp 2 ~ ~ 1 2 Relationship mass and energy Ep = qmpc c = c lp lp c ~ Reduced Compton wavelength lp mpc 2 ~G 2 2 Planck area lp = c3 lp = lp 3 ~3G3 3 3 Planck volume lp = c9 lp = lp 4 Ep ~ c ~ c Planck force Fp = =q = Fp = lp lptp G lp lp 5 2 Ep c ~ c Planck power Pp = = Pp = tp G lp lp 1 5 ~ mp c lp c ~ 1 ~ 1 Planck mass density ⇢p = 3 = 2 ⇢p = 3 = 4 = 3 lp ~G lp lp c lp clp 7 ~ c E Ep c E lp ~ ~ c Planck energy density ⇢p = 3 = 2 ⇢p = 3 = 4 c = 3 lp ~G lp lp lp lp 8 2 c ~ c Planck intensity Ip = ⇢pc = 2 Ip = 3 ~G lp lp 1 c5 1 c Planck frequency !p = = !p = = tp ~G lp lp c 7 Fp ~ q c ~ c Planck pressure pp = 2 = 3 = 2 pp = 3 lp lptp ~G lp lp Planck length is derived from Newton’s gravitational con- adds support to the view that the Planck length could be stant. We should consider this in a historical perspective. just as fundamental as big G, if not more so. Although Newton’s gravitational constant was discovered long be- our technology is not advanced enough yet for precision fore the Planck length was even considered (in 1906). in such analysis, it may be in the not too distant future. The Planck length was derived from the gravitational One could argue that the equation is biting its own constant, the speed of light, and the Planck constant. tail as the maximum velocity is a function of the Planck However, it could have taken place the other way around length, e.g. we have simply invented a circular solution if the Planck length had been introduced as a “hypothet- to the Planck length with no real solution. However, this ical” fundamental entity first. The fact that Newton’s is a misconception. The important point is that vmax gravitational constant was discovered before the Planck can be measured experimentally (At a minimum within length was established does not necessarily make it more a thought experiment, that is until our technology for fundamental than the Planck length. Newton’s gravita- accelerating particles get more advanced.) and we know tional constant was likely discovered first because it was that vmax is the composite structure, thus we can use this easier to measure; this is true even if Big G is hard to to extract lp. We typically know the reduced Compton measure accurately; see [4–8]. Even so, Big G is easier wavelength (of an electron, for example) and we know c to measure (indirectly) than the Planck length. per definition; based on this, we can extract lp. Remark- Recently Haug [9, 10] has given a new theoretical in- ably, we need no knowledge of G or ~ to find the find the sight strongly suggesting that fundamental particles in Planck length and even the Planck mass. Einstein’s relativistic mass equation actually have a max- The maximum velocity derived by Haug can also be 1 imum velocity just below that of the speed of light. This written as a function of G, c, ~ and me can be seen as an additional “boundary condition” that a↵ects the interpretation of Einstein’s relativistic mass Gm2 l2 energy formula without actually changing the formula it- v = c 1 e = c 1 p c 1 1.7517 10 45 max ¯2 − self. The maximum velocity can be estimated accurately r − ~c s − λe ⇡ − ⇥ and is far above the velocity currently attained at the p (7) LHC. Still, what is most interesting in this context is Since vmax here is a function of the universal constants that the Planck length can be found experimentally to G, ~, and c one could try to argue that this is evidence be only a function of the speed of light c and the reduced Compton wavelength of the mass in question; the Haug v2 formula for the Planck length is: l = λ¯ 1 max .This 1 Thanks to an anonymous referee for pointing this out. p − c2 q 3 that lp must be a function of G and ~ and c and not From the rewriting above, we see that that fine struc- that G is a function of lp. In other words, that G must ture constants appear in several places and cancel each be a universal constant and lp is just a derived constant. other out, basically illustrating the Planck relationship However, the beauty of equation 7 is that G and ~ cancel described in 1906. In other words, the Planck length out and that we are left with vmax as a function of c, lp (and thereby the gravitational constant) is not directly only and the reduced Compton wavelength of the particle dependent on electromagnetic constants and we do not in question, λ¯, and not of G and ~. It is worth pointing seem to lose any information by writing Newton’s grav- l2 c3 out that, for example, the reduced Compton wavelength itational constant in the form G = p . Naturally this ~ of an electron can experimentally be found completely does not exclude the possibility of other relationships ex- independent of any knowledge of G,see[11]. To find lp isting between electromagnetism and gravity, but an in- one need the reduced Compton wavelength that can be depth discussion of such ideas is outside the scope of this found totally independent on G as well at the maximum paper.
Recommended publications
  • An Atomic Physics Perspective on the New Kilogram Defined by Planck's Constant
    An atomic physics perspective on the new kilogram defined by Planck’s constant (Wolfgang Ketterle and Alan O. Jamison, MIT) (Manuscript submitted to Physics Today) On May 20, the kilogram will no longer be defined by the artefact in Paris, but through the definition1 of Planck’s constant h=6.626 070 15*10-34 kg m2/s. This is the result of advances in metrology: The best two measurements of h, the Watt balance and the silicon spheres, have now reached an accuracy similar to the mass drift of the ur-kilogram in Paris over 130 years. At this point, the General Conference on Weights and Measures decided to use the precisely measured numerical value of h as the definition of h, which then defines the unit of the kilogram. But how can we now explain in simple terms what exactly one kilogram is? How do fixed numerical values of h, the speed of light c and the Cs hyperfine frequency νCs define the kilogram? In this article we give a simple conceptual picture of the new kilogram and relate it to the practical realizations of the kilogram. A similar change occurred in 1983 for the definition of the meter when the speed of light was defined to be 299 792 458 m/s. Since the second was the time required for 9 192 631 770 oscillations of hyperfine radiation from a cesium atom, defining the speed of light defined the meter as the distance travelled by light in 1/9192631770 of a second, or equivalently, as 9192631770/299792458 times the wavelength of the cesium hyperfine radiation.
    [Show full text]
  • Units and Magnitudes (Lecture Notes)
    physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek Units and Magnitudes (lecture notes) This lecture has two parts. The first part is mainly a practical guide to the measurement units that dominate the particle physics literature, and culture. The second part is a quasi-philosophical discussion of deep issues around unit systems, including a comparison of atomic, particle ("strong") and Planck units. For a more extended, profound treatment of the second part issues, see arxiv.org/pdf/0708.4361v1.pdf . Because special relativity and quantum mechanics permeate modern particle physics, it is useful to employ units so that c = ħ = 1. In other words, we report velocities as multiples the speed of light c, and actions (or equivalently angular momenta) as multiples of the rationalized Planck's constant ħ, which is the original Planck constant h divided by 2π. 27 August 2013 physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek In classical physics one usually keeps separate units for mass, length and time. I invite you to think about why! (I'll give you my take on it later.) To bring out the "dimensional" features of particle physics units without excess baggage, it is helpful to keep track of powers of mass M, length L, and time T without regard to magnitudes, in the form When these are both set equal to 1, the M, L, T system collapses to just one independent dimension. So we can - and usually do - consider everything as having the units of some power of mass. Thus for energy we have while for momentum 27 August 2013 physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek and for length so that energy and momentum have the units of mass, while length has the units of inverse mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of Forest Aboveground Biomass and Uncertainties By
    Urbazaev et al. Carbon Balance Manage (2018) 13:5 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-018-0093-5 RESEARCH Open Access Estimation of forest aboveground biomass and uncertainties by integration of feld measurements, airborne LiDAR, and SAR and optical satellite data in Mexico Mikhail Urbazaev1,2* , Christian Thiel1, Felix Cremer1, Ralph Dubayah3, Mirco Migliavacca4, Markus Reichstein4 and Christiane Schmullius1 Abstract Background: Information on the spatial distribution of aboveground biomass (AGB) over large areas is needed for understanding and managing processes involved in the carbon cycle and supporting international policies for climate change mitigation and adaption. Furthermore, these products provide important baseline data for the development of sustainable management strategies to local stakeholders. The use of remote sensing data can provide spatially explicit information of AGB from local to global scales. In this study, we mapped national Mexican forest AGB using satellite remote sensing data and a machine learning approach. We modelled AGB using two scenarios: (1) extensive national forest inventory (NFI), and (2) airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) as reference data. Finally, we propagated uncertainties from feld measurements to LiDAR-derived AGB and to the national wall-to-wall forest AGB map. Results: The estimated AGB maps (NFI- and LiDAR-calibrated) showed similar goodness-of-ft statistics (R­ 2, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)) at three diferent scales compared to the independent validation data set. We observed diferent spatial patterns of AGB in tropical dense forests, where no or limited number of NFI data were available, with higher AGB values in the LiDAR-calibrated map. We estimated much higher uncertainties in the AGB maps based on two-stage up-scaling method (i.e., from feld measurements to LiDAR and from LiDAR-based estimates to satel- lite imagery) compared to the traditional feld to satellite up-scaling.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving the Accuracy of the Numerical Values of the Estimates Some Fundamental Physical Constants
    Improving the accuracy of the numerical values of the estimates some fundamental physical constants. Valery Timkov, Serg Timkov, Vladimir Zhukov, Konstantin Afanasiev To cite this version: Valery Timkov, Serg Timkov, Vladimir Zhukov, Konstantin Afanasiev. Improving the accuracy of the numerical values of the estimates some fundamental physical constants.. Digital Technologies, Odessa National Academy of Telecommunications, 2019, 25, pp.23 - 39. hal-02117148 HAL Id: hal-02117148 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02117148 Submitted on 2 May 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Improving the accuracy of the numerical values of the estimates some fundamental physical constants. Valery F. Timkov1*, Serg V. Timkov2, Vladimir A. Zhukov2, Konstantin E. Afanasiev2 1Institute of Telecommunications and Global Geoinformation Space of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Senior Researcher, Ukraine. 2Research and Production Enterprise «TZHK», Researcher, Ukraine. *Email: [email protected] The list of designations in the text: l
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full-Text
    International Journal of Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 2021, 11(1): 29-59 DOI: 10.5923/j.ijtmp.20211101.03 Measurement Quantization Describes the Physical Constants Jody A. Geiger 1Department of Research, Informativity Institute, Chicago, IL, USA Abstract It has been a long-standing goal in physics to present a physical model that may be used to describe and correlate the physical constants. We demonstrate, this is achieved by describing phenomena in terms of Planck Units and introducing a new concept, counts of Planck Units. Thus, we express the existing laws of classical mechanics in terms of units and counts of units to demonstrate that the physical constants may be expressed using only these terms. But this is not just a nomenclature substitution. With this approach we demonstrate that the constants and the laws of nature may be described with just the count terms or just the dimensional unit terms. Moreover, we demonstrate that there are three frames of reference important to observation. And with these principles we resolve the relation of the physical constants. And we resolve the SI values for the physical constants. Notably, we resolve the relation between gravitation and electromagnetism. Keywords Measurement Quantization, Physical Constants, Unification, Fine Structure Constant, Electric Constant, Magnetic Constant, Planck’s Constant, Gravitational Constant, Elementary Charge ground state orbital a0 and mass of an electron me – both 1. Introduction measures from the 2018 CODATA – we resolve fundamental length l . And we continue with the resolution of We present expressions, their calculation and the f the gravitational constant G, Planck’s reduced constant ħ corresponding CODATA [1,2] values in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Rational Dimensia
    Rational Dimensia R. Hanush Physics Phor Phun, Paso Robles, CA 93446∗ (Received) Rational Dimensia is a comprehensive examination of three questions: What is a dimension? Does direction necessarily imply dimension? Can all physical law be derived from geometric principles? A dimension is any physical quantity that can be measured. If space is considered as a single dimension with a plurality of directions, then the spatial dimension forms the second of three axes in a Dimensional Coordinate System (DCS); geometric units normalize unit vectors of time, space, and mass. In the DCS all orders n of any type of motion are subject to geometric analysis in the space- time plane. An nth-order distance formula can be derived from geometric and physical principles using only algebra, geometry, and trigonometry; the concept of the derivative is invoked but not relied upon. Special relativity, general relativity, and perihelion precession are shown to be geometric functions of velocity, acceleration, and jerk (first-, second-, and third-order Lorentz transformations) with v2 coefficients of n! = 1, 2, and 6, respectively. An nth-order Lorentz transformation is extrapolated. An exponential scaling of all DCS coordinate axes results in an ordered Periodic Table of Dimensions, a periodic table of elements for physics. Over 1600 measurement units are fitted to 72 elements; a complete catalog is available online at EPAPS. All physical law can be derived from geometric principles considering only a single direction in space, and direction is unique to the physical quantity of space, so direction does not imply dimension. I. INTRODUCTION analysis can be applied to all.
    [Show full text]
  • The ST System of Units Leading the Way to Unification
    The ST system of units Leading the way to unification © Xavier Borg B.Eng.(Hons.) - Blaze Labs Research First electronic edition published as part of the Unified Theory Foundations (Feb 2005) [1] Abstract This paper shows that all measurable quantities in physics can be represented as nothing more than a number of spatial dimensions differentiated by a number of temporal dimensions and vice versa. To convert between the numerical values given by the space-time system of units and the conventional SI system, one simply multiplies the results by specific dimensionless constants. Once the ST system of units presented here is applied to any set of physics parameters, one is then able to derive all laws and equations without reference to the original theory which presented said relationship. In other words, all known principles and numerical constants which took hundreds of years to be discovered, like Ohm's Law, energy mass equivalence, Newton's Laws, etc.. would simply follow naturally from the spatial and temporal dimensions themselves, and can be derived without any reference to standard theoretical background. Hundreds of new equations can be derived using the ST table included in this paper. The relation between any combination of physical parameters, can be derived at any instant. Included is a step by step worked example showing how to derive any free space constant and quantum constant. 1 Dimensions and dimensional analysis One of the most powerful mathematical tools in science is dimensional analysis. Dimensional analysis is often applied in different scientific fields to simplify a problem by reducing the number of variables to the smallest number of "essential" parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Constants and Units and the Search for Temporal Variations
    Lecture Notes for the Schladming Winter School "Masses and Constants" 2010. Published in Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 203-204, 18 (2010) 1 Fundamental constants and units and the search for temporal variations Ekkehard Peika aPhysikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany This article reviews two aspects of the present research on fundamental constants: their use in a universal and precisely realizable system of units for metrology and the search for a conceivable temporal drift of the constants that may open an experimental window to new physics. 1. INTRODUCTION mainly focus on two examples: the unit of mass that is presently realized via an artefact that shall These lectures attempt to cover two active top- be replaced by a quantum definition based on fun- ics of research in the field of the fundamental con- damental constants and the unit of time, which stants whose motivations may seem to be discon- is exceptional in the accuracy to which time and nected or even opposed. On one hand there is a frequencies can be measured with atomic clocks. successful program in metrology to link the real- The second part will give a brief motivation for ization of the base units as closely as possible to the search for variations of constants, will re- the values of fundamental constants like the speed view some observations in geophysics and in as- of light c, the elementary charge e etc., because trophysics and will finally describe laboratory ex- such an approach promises to provide a univer- periments that make use of a new generation of sal and precise system for all measurements of highly precise atomic clocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Planck Dimensional Analysis of Big G
    Planck Dimensional Analysis of Big G Espen Gaarder Haug⇤ Norwegian University of Life Sciences July 3, 2016 Abstract This is a short note to show how big G can be derived from dimensional analysis by assuming that the Planck length [1] is much more fundamental than Newton’s gravitational constant. Key words: Big G, Newton, Planck units, Dimensional analysis, Fundamental constants, Atomism. 1 Dimensional Analysis Haug [2, 3, 4] has suggested that Newton’s gravitational constant (Big G) [5] can be written as l2c3 G = p ¯h Writing the gravitational constant in this way helps us to simplify and quantify a long series of equations in gravitational theory without changing the value of G, see [3]. This also enables us simplify the Planck units. We can find this G by solving for the Planck mass or the Planck length with respect to G, as has already been done by Haug. We will claim that G is not anything physical or tangible and that the Planck length may be much more fundamental than the Newton’s gravitational constant. If we assume the Planck length is a more fundamental constant than G,thenwecanalsofindG through “traditional” dimensional analysis. Here we will assume that the speed of light c, the Planck length lp, and the reduced Planck constanth ¯ are the three fundamental constants. The dimensions of G and the three fundamental constants are L3 [G]= MT2 L2 [¯h]=M T L [c]= T [lp]=L Based on this, we have ↵ β γ G = lp c ¯h L3 L β L2 γ = L↵ M (1) MT2 T T ✓ ◆ ✓ ◆ Based on this, we obtain the following three equations Lenght : 3 = ↵ + β +2γ (2) Mass : 1=γ (3) − Time : 2= β γ (4) − − − ⇤e-mail [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Spaces Are Modular Arxiv:1606.01829V2 [Hep-Th]
    Quantum Spaces are Modular a b c Laurent Freidel, ∗ Robert G. Leigh y and Djordje Minic z a Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, 31 Caroline St. N., Waterloo ON, N2L 2Y5, Canada b Department of Physics, University of Illinois, 1110 West Green St., Urbana IL 61801, U.S.A. c Department of Physics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA 24061, U.S.A. November 7, 2016 Abstract At present, our notion of space is a classical concept. Taking the point of view that quantum theory is more fundamental than classical physics, and that space should be given a purely quantum definition, we revisit the notion of Euclidean space from the point of view of quantum mechanics. Since space appears in physics in the form of labels on relativistic fields or Schr¨odingerwave functionals, we propose to define Euclidean quantum space as a choice of polarization for the Heisenberg algebra of quantum theory. We show, following Mackey, that generically, such polarizations contain a fundamen- tal length scale and that contrary to what is implied by the Schr¨odingerpolarization, they possess topologically distinct spectra. These are the modular spaces. We show that they naturally come equipped with additional geometrical structures usually en- countered in the context of string theory or generalized geometry. Moreover, we show how modular space reconciles the presence of a fundamental scale with translation and rotation invariance. We also discuss how the usual classical notion of space comes out as a form of thermodynamical limit of modular space while the Schr¨odingerspace is a singular limit. The concept of classical space-time is one of the basic building blocks of physics.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyclic Cosmology, Conformal Symmetry and the Metastability of the Higgs ∗ Itzhak Bars A, Paul J
    Physics Letters B 726 (2013) 50–55 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Physics Letters B www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb Cyclic cosmology, conformal symmetry and the metastability of the Higgs ∗ Itzhak Bars a, Paul J. Steinhardt b,c, , Neil Turok d a Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0484, USA b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA c Department of Physics and Princeton Center for Theoretical Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA d Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, ON N2L 2Y5, Canada article info abstract Article history: Recent measurements at the LHC suggest that the current Higgs vacuum could be metastable with a Received 31 July 2013 modest barrier (height (1010–12 GeV)4) separating it from a ground state with negative vacuum density Received in revised form 23 August 2013 of order the Planck scale. We note that metastability is problematic for standard bang cosmology but Accepted 26 August 2013 is essential for cyclic cosmology in order to end one cycle, bounce, and begin the next. In this Letter, Available online 2 September 2013 motivated by the approximate scaling symmetry of the standard model of particle physics and the Editor: M. Cveticˇ primordial large-scale structure of the universe, we use our recent formulation of the Weyl-invariant version of the standard model coupled to gravity to track the evolution of the Higgs in a regularly bouncing cosmology. We find a band of solutions in which the Higgs field escapes from the metastable phase during each big crunch, passes through the bang into an expanding phase, and returns to the metastable vacuum, cycle after cycle after cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics and Technology System of Units for Electrodynamics
    PHYSICS AND TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM OF UNITS FOR ELECTRODYNAMICS∗ M. G. Ivanov† Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology Dolgoprudny, Russia Abstract The contemporary practice is to favor the use of the SI units for electric circuits and the Gaussian CGS system for electromagnetic field. A modification of the Gaussian system of units (the Physics and Technology System) is suggested. In the Physics and Technology System the units of measurement for electrical circuits coincide with SI units, and the equations for the electromagnetic field are almost the same form as in the Gaussian system. The XXIV CGMP (2011) Resolution ¾On the possible future revision of the International System of Units, the SI¿ provides a chance to initiate gradual introduction of the Physics and Technology System as a new modification of the SI. Keywords: SI, International System of Units, electrodynamics, Physics and Technology System of units, special relativity. 1. Introduction. One and a half century dispute The problem of choice of units for electrodynamics dates back to the time of M. Faraday (1822–1831) and J. Maxwell (1861–1873). Electrodynamics acquired its final form only after geometrization of special relativity by H. Minkowski (1907–1909). The improvement of contemporary (4-dimentional relativistic covariant) formulation of electrodynamics and its implementation in practice of higher education stretched not less than a half of century. Overview of some systems of units, which are used in electrodynamics could be found, for example, in books [2, 3] and paper [4]. Legislation and standards of many countries recommend to use in science and education The International System of Units (SI).
    [Show full text]