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 }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 20, 2018. It is now read-only.
The values of physical constants should come from CODATA and include uncertainty. For now I don't see a clear path towards including covariance between constants in a way that propagates, so I think we just have to have a disclaimer saying the covariance is treated as 0. Here is a proposed path
Create a PhysicalConstant type that acts as an Uncertain when interacting with Uncertain or Quantity{Uncertain}, and otherwise acts as a Quantity.
Create a mapping between CODATA names and Physical names, and a loop that uses that mapping to create PhysicalConstant variables in the Physical namespace.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
The values of physical constants should come from CODATA and include uncertainty. For now I don't see a clear path towards including covariance between constants in a way that propagates, so I think we just have to have a disclaimer saying the covariance is treated as 0. Here is a proposed path
PhysicalConstant
type that acts as anUncertain
when interacting withUncertain
orQuantity{Uncertain}
, and otherwise acts as aQuantity
.PhysicalConstant
variables in the Physical namespace.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: