Abstract
DR. LODGE'S remarks on p. 513 (April 2), ought not, I think, to pass without protest. He very reasonably objects to being asked to use a formula which is adapted to one particular set of units, and is not convenient for any other set, and prefers the greater freedom which is usually indulged in, as regards units, in mathematical physics. But he goes further than this, and maintains that it is best (he almost suggests that it is necessary) that Prof. Greenhill's practical man, if he wishes to avoid the somewhat mild difficulties which at present beset him, should adopt the system set forth in NATURE, vol. xxxviii. p. 281. It may be a reasonable thing to do to base the interpretation of physical equations upon the method of multiplication of concrete quantities described in the article referred to; but that the practical man, whose difficulties are in question, is likely to take the trouble to understand it, may be confidently denied.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
MACAULAY, W. The Meaning of Algebraic Symbols in Applied Mathematics. Nature 43, 558 (1891). https://doi.org/10.1038/043558a0
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/043558a0