By 'Space Per Time' I mean m/s (meters per second aka velocity) or m/s^2 (meters per second squared aka acceleration) or c/s (charge per second aka Amps) or 1/s (occurrences per second aka Hertz aka frequency) aka Space/Time aka Space Per Time. What if instead we made our electrical engineering equations with respect to space, not time. So instead of m/s, m/s^2, c/s, 1/s it becomes s/m (seconds per meter) or s/m^2 (seconds per meter squared) or s/c (seconds per charge) or s/1 (seconds per occurrence) aka Time/Space aka Time Per Space.
The dimension of space is much more conducive to being 'squared' or 'cubed' than the dimension of time is. It is difficult for the brain to physically visualize 'per seconds squared', but it is very easy for the brain to physically visualize 'per meters squared'. A square second can't be naturally represented in physical reality(in a way that I know of), but a square meter can be represented in physical reality very simply, its the shape of a square in space. A square is a spatial pattern containing 4 equal sides connected at 90 degree angles. Even the words 'squared' and 'cubed' describe spatial shapes not temporal shapes.
Change in spatial coordinates per temporal measurement seems to make things unnecessarily complex. If instead we based our engineering equations(especially electrical equations) on change in temporal coordinates per spatial measurement electrical equations would become much easier to visualize within the mind. Squared and cubed spatial measurements directly relate to observable reality but squared and cubed temporal measurements have no relation to observable reality. Time coordinates can be past, present, or future, while space coordinates can be length, height, width, depth, angle, density, concentration, volume, position, etc. In other words space measurements require more coordinates to accurately measure than time measurements.
Time Per Space seems to be far simpler than Space Per Time.
The dimension of space is much more conducive to being 'squared' or 'cubed' than the dimension of time is. It is difficult for the brain to physically visualize 'per seconds squared', but it is very easy for the brain to physically visualize 'per meters squared'. A square second can't be naturally represented in physical reality(in a way that I know of), but a square meter can be represented in physical reality very simply, its the shape of a square in space. A square is a spatial pattern containing 4 equal sides connected at 90 degree angles. Even the words 'squared' and 'cubed' describe spatial shapes not temporal shapes.
Change in spatial coordinates per temporal measurement seems to make things unnecessarily complex. If instead we based our engineering equations(especially electrical equations) on change in temporal coordinates per spatial measurement electrical equations would become much easier to visualize within the mind. Squared and cubed spatial measurements directly relate to observable reality but squared and cubed temporal measurements have no relation to observable reality. Time coordinates can be past, present, or future, while space coordinates can be length, height, width, depth, angle, density, concentration, volume, position, etc. In other words space measurements require more coordinates to accurately measure than time measurements.
Time Per Space seems to be far simpler than Space Per Time.
Comment