You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Electric charge base unit in cgs should not be Coulomb #4354
@astrofrog - I think this might be intended behavior, although admittedly a bit counter-intuitive. Remember that "cgs" alone isn't enough to determine how E&M constants and units behave: you have to decide if you're using electrostatic, gaussian, or one of the other conventions. So maybe the choice was made to do C instead of picking one of them? There's some discussion of this in #745, although I think there's some elsewhere too that's more relevant. @embray or @mdboom might also remember more clearly.
Regardless, the current behavior does seem counter-intuitive, though. See #4355 for an alternative approach.
Activity
eteq commentedon Nov 29, 2015
@astrofrog - I think this might be intended behavior, although admittedly a bit counter-intuitive. Remember that "cgs" alone isn't enough to determine how E&M constants and units behave: you have to decide if you're using electrostatic, gaussian, or one of the other conventions. So maybe the choice was made to do
Cinstead of picking one of them? There's some discussion of this in #745, although I think there's some elsewhere too that's more relevant. @embray or @mdboom might also remember more clearly.Regardless, the current behavior does seem counter-intuitive, though. See #4355 for an alternative approach.