Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 70 references

Dimensional Analysis is a Gauge Theory

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Dimensional analysis is a gauge theory: quantities live in weighted line bundles, and units are gauge choices.

desk verdict Clean bundle-theoretic formalization of dimensional analysis, but the 'gauge theory' claim is a useful framing rather than a new dynamical structure. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.21695 v1 pith:7JKTRPLN submitted 2026-07-23 physics.hist-ph gr-qchep-thmath-phmath.MP

Benjamin Muntz This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.hist-phgr-qchep-thmath-phmath.MP
keywords dimensionalanalysisgaugetheoryquantitycalculusweightedlinebundlesprincipalBuckingham-Pitheoremscalesofmeasurementinvariant
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that dimensional analysis is, literally, a gauge theory: quantities are sections of line bundles associated to a principal bundle whose fibres record local choices of unit scale, and a choice of base units is a choice of gauge. The usual rules of quantity calculus — multiplication adds dimension exponents, addition requires equal dimensions — follow from representation theory of the group of positive rescaling factors rather than being assumed. The paper also shows that the four classical scale types (ratio, interval, ordinal, nominal) correspond to enlarging the structure group, and reframes the Buckingham-Pi theorem as a counting problem in invariant theory: the number of independent dimensionless groups equals the dimension of the orbit space of the group action on the space of quantities. A sympathetic reader would care because this gives units and dimensional analysis a structural home in the same mathematics used across gauge theories, and it offers a precise language for longstanding questions about non-constant units and the physical equivalence of conformal frames.

What carries the argument

The scale bundle: a principal R_+^k-bundle P over spacetime whose fibres record local choices of unit scale. A weight w — a vector of dimension exponents — defines a one-dimensional representation ρ_w of R_+^k, and a quantity of weight w is a section of the associated line bundle L_w = P ×_{ρ_w} R. The tensor product rule ρ_w ⊗ ρ_w' = ρ_{w+w'} makes multiplication of quantities add dimensions and addition require equal dimensions. A choice of base units is a trivialisation of P, i.e. a gauge choice. For non-constant units, a connection on P determines which units count as 'constant' via a covariant derivative. The number of independent dimensionless products is the dimension of the orbit spa

What would settle it

A concrete falsifier: exhibit an empirically correct physical law that changes its truth value under a uniform rescaling of all units (i.e., a valid equation that is not dimensionally homogeneous and cannot be rewritten in dimensionless form); alternatively, an experiment that distinguishes two conformal frames of a scalar-tensor theory would refute the claim that frame changes are merely local unit changes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Quantities with dimension-vector w are sections of the line bundle L_w = P ×_{ρ_w} R associated to the principal R_+^k-bundle P; a unit is a positive section of such a bundle, and a complete set of base units is a global trivialisation of P — a gauge choice. The quantity calculus then follows from representation theory: multiplication tensors representations (weights add), and addition is covariant only for equal weights (dimensional homogeneity). The Buckingham-Pi theorem becomes a counting problem in invariant theory: the number of independent dimensionless groups equals the dimension of the orbit space of the group action on the space of quantities, and the same counting applies to ordina

Load-bearing premise

The argument leans on the premise that the choice of unit is a genuinely local matter — one may pick a different scale at each spacetime point and compare choices between points. If units are by definition global constants, the scale bundle is trivial and the construction, while formally correct, becomes a repackaging rather than an explanation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A choice of base units is a gauge choice, so gauge-fixing reasoning can be applied to unit choices, and local unit transformations are gauge transformations.
  • Quantity calculus is derived, not assumed: multiplication adds dimension exponents and addition requires equal dimensions because these are facts about one-dimensional representations of R_+^k.
  • The classical scale types (ratio, interval, ordinal, nominal) correspond to enlarging the structure group from R_+ to affine transformations, order-preserving diffeomorphisms, and all diffeomorphisms respectively.
  • The Buckingham-Pi theorem is an invariant-counting result; for other gauge groups the analogous statement is a theorem on smooth invariant functions for compact groups, and counting the minimal number of independent invariants is in general a hard problem of invariant theory.
  • Non-constant units are handled naturally by a connection on the scale bundle; changing conformal frames in scalar-tensor gravity is literally a local unit transformation, with the frame-covariant derivative identified as a gauge-covariant derivative.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's own caveat that the gauge-theoretic reading is strongest for non-constant units implies that, if one insists all fundamental units are global constants, the formalism reduces to a repackaging of simpler torsor language; the novelty therefore rests on the local-unit premise.
  • If the conformal-frame equivalence of scalar-tensor theories turns out to fail at the quantum level (a question the paper leaves open), the needed fix would be a non-trivial connection on the scale bundle — a concrete place to look for quantum corrections.
  • The invariant-counting reading suggests that determining the number of independent operators in any effective field theory is the same kind of problem as counting Pi groups; one could use the orbit-space dimension formula to estimate the number of independent couplings in theories where invariant generators are hard to find.
  • The paper's closing speculation — that quantum gravity may forbid exact non-compact gauge symmetries, making dimensionality at most representational — could be tested by asking whether any consistent quantum-gravity effective theory must necessarily break local unit invariance.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes to understand dimensional analysis as a gauge theory. It introduces a principal R_+^k-bundle P over a manifold M (the 'scale bundle'), identifies the Lie algebra with R^k, and defines weights w in the dual of the Lie algebra. Quantities are defined as sections of associated weighted line bundles L_w = P ×_{ρ_w} R (or tensor products with ordinary vector bundles), and units are sections of the positive subbundles L_w^+ or, for k=1, trivialisations of P. Proposition 6 derives the standard rules of quantity calculus from representation theory. Section 3 adds connections to discuss non-constant units and connects the frame-covariant derivative of scalar-tensor theory to the induced gauge-covariant derivative. Section 4 maps Stevens's scale types to gauge groups R_+, Aff(1,R), Diff_+(R), Diff(R), and distinguishes dimensionless from unit-independent quantities. Section 5 reinterprets the Buckingham-Π theorem as an invariant-theoretic orbit-space counting problem, with worked examples from a simple pendulum, a U(1)^3 model, and the Standard Model Yukawa sector, and relates it to Schwarz's theorem for compact groups.

Significance. This is a well-executed conceptual formalization. If accepted, it gives a unified account of quantity calculus as a consequence of representation theory, clarifies the number-unit decomposition, connects dimensional analysis to established gauge-theoretic machinery, and offers useful cross-links to the frame-covariant formalism and to invariant theory. The paper is honest about the limitations: R_+^k-bundles are topologically trivial, the connections considered are flat, and there is no charge quantization. The definitions and propositions are internally consistent, and the worked examples check out. The stress-test objection that the gauge content is 'pure gauge' does not, in my reading, undercut the central claim: a gauge theory may perfectly well have trivial bundles and flat connections, and the proposed formalism still provides a genuine gauge-theoretic description. The main residual caveat is that the strength of the interpretation depends on the adopted convention of local unit choice, which the paper explicitly acknowledges.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 5, Eq. (5.4)] The counting formula dim(V/G) = dim V − dim G + dim G_stab is applied to the noncompact group R_+^k, where the quotient can be non-Hausdorff and smooth invariant functions need not separate non-closed orbits (as the footnote notes). Since Section 5 is the paper's advertised reinterpretation of Buckingham-Π, please state the precise working hypotheses: (i) restrict to a G-invariant open stratum where the action has locally constant generic stabiliser; (ii) the weight vectors span g^* (equivalently, the rank of the dimensional matrix is k); and (iii) interpret 'dim(V/G)' as the dimension of the generic stratum of the orbit space. This would also make transparent that the classical Buckingham theorem gives m−r, with r the rank of the dimensional matrix.
  2. [Section 2, after Definition 1; Abstract] The strong phrase 'wholly understood' is wider than what is actually established. The gauge-theoretic reading is most substantive when unit choices are allowed to be local; if one adopts M={pt} or insists on constant units, the construction reduces to the known G-torsor formalism. The paper already acknowledges this and even calls dimensional analysis 'the most boring gauge theory,' but the title/abstract could be calibrated (e.g., 'can be faithfully modeled as a gauge theory') to avoid overclaiming.
  3. [Section 4, Table 1] The table is suggestive, but Diff_+(R) and Diff(R) are infinite-dimensional and are not finite-dimensional principal-bundle structure groups of the kind used in the rest of the paper. A sentence clarifying that this part is an extrapolation of the formalism, rather than a theorem, would help; the text mostly does this, but the table could easily be read too strongly.
  4. [Section 3.1, Eq. (3.11)] The claim that the frame-covariant derivative is 'literally' the gauge-covariant derivative induced on weighted bundles is stated informally. Footnote 13 gives the essential identification, but the principal connection on the conformal ray bundle Q is not explicitly defined, and the gauge μ = (√f)^{-1} is introduced in words rather than by a derivation. A concise derivation of D X = dX − w d log√f X as the pullback connection in that gauge would make the 'literal' claim precise.
  5. [Section 2, Proposition 8 proof] Minor typo: in the proof, W is defined using w_1,...,w_k even though n may differ from k; after the basis condition n=k, but the notation should be w_1,...,w_n, or the text should explicitly state n=k. Also, 'complete basis' should probably be just 'basis'.
  6. [General] A final proofread is recommended. For example, the spelling of Janyška's name in the bibliography and a few duplicated or missing words in the text should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the gauge-theoretic formalization is definition-transparent and self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's derivations are transparent rather than circular. Section 2 defines quantities as sections of associated line bundles L_w = P ×_{ρ_w} R (Definition 4), with weights w ∈ g* and ρ_w(g)=exp(w(log g)) (Definition 2). Lemma 3 then shows that tensor products of one-dimensional representations add weights, and Proposition 6 uses this to recover the addition, multiplication, and homogeneity rules of quantity calculus. This is a representation theorem: the algebraic rules are consequences of the representation theory of R_+^k, not assumptions hidden in the definitions. Choosing ρ_w to encode dimensions is a modeling choice, not a circular inference. Section 3's covariant derivative and Section 5's Buckingham-Π counting are translations of known results into bundle language; the paper explicitly presents the Buckingham-Π discussion as a reinterpretation and rephrasing, not as a novel empirical prediction. The only self-citations (Karamitsos & Muntz 2025; Järv & Karamitsos 2026) are motivational or contextual, and the frame-covariant derivative identification is derived from Eqs. (3.11)-(3.12) rather than imported from those works. There are no fitted parameters, no uniqueness theorem invoked as external mathematical fact to force the paper's choice, and no ansatz smuggled in through a citation. The skeptic's point that the scale bundle is topologically trivial and all connections considered are pure gauge may weaken the novelty of the philosophical thesis, but it is not a circularity and does not make the derivation self-referential.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No free parameters fitted to data. The central claim rests on the modeling choice that quantities are sections of associated bundles (Definition 4) and on the domain assumption that unit choices are local (Section 2). Standard bundle theory and Schwarz's theorem supply the remaining background. The paper's mathematical arguments are self-contained, with honest caveats about generic stabilizers and the conformal-bundle identification.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Quantities of weight w are sections of the associated line bundle L_w = P ×_{rho_w} R (Definition 4).
    This is the paper's fundamental modeling move: dimensional quantities are identified with sections of weighted line bundles. Quantity calculus then follows from representation theory by construction rather than from independent physical principles.
  • domain assumption The scale bundle is a principal R_+^k-bundle over spacetime M (Definition 1).
    The paper postulates that unit-rescaling freedom forms a multiplicative group R_+^k and that this freedom is organised as a principal bundle over spacetime.
  • domain assumption Unit choices are local (Section 2: 'the choice of unit is evidently local').
    The Europe/US and evaporating-glass thought experiments motivate local unit freedom; without this premise the connection formalism in Section 3 is superfluous and the gauge interpretation reduces to a trivial bundle.
  • ad hoc to paper Stevens's scale types map to structure groups R_+, Aff(1,R), Diff_+(R), Diff(R) (Table 1).
    This mapping is a new proposal in the paper; it is natural but not forced by the earlier bundle formalism, and for interval/ordinal/nominal scales the group action on associated fibers is not a linear representation.
  • ad hoc to paper The scale bundle is isomorphic to the conformal ray subbundle Q ⊂ S^2T^*M (Section 3.1).
    The paper explicitly assumes this identification to make the frame-covariant derivative of scalar-tensor gravity 'literally' the gauge-covariant derivative on weighted bundles.
  • standard math Schwarz's Theorem (1975) for compact Lie groups (Theorem 11).
    Used to generalize the Buckingham-Π reinterpretation to gauge theories; requires compactness of the group, which the paper acknowledges.
  • standard math The orbit-space dimension formula dim(V/G) = dim V − dim G + dim G_stab on a regular stratification with generic stabilizer (Section 5, Eq. 5.4).
    Used to count the number of Π's. Requires regularity/generic conditions; the paper acknowledges non-closed orbits in footnote 21.
  • standard math Standard principal bundle and representation theory background (associated bundles, connections, weighted representations).
    Unproved background results invoked throughout Sections 2–3.
invented entities (2)
  • Scale bundle P (principal R_+^k-bundle over spacetime M)
    purpose: Provides a mathematical home for local unit choices, making 'a choice of base units is a choice of gauge' precise (Definition 1).
    A new mathematical structure introduced for dimensional analysis; it is not empirically testable on its own, but it is internally consistent and reproduces quantity calculus and the Buckingham-Π theorem.
  • Associated weighted line bundle L_w = P ×_{rho_w} R
    purpose: Represents dimensionful quantities of weight w as sections, so weight addition and dimensional homogeneity follow from representation theory (Definition 4).
    A mathematical construction with no independent falsifiable handle; its support is that it reproduces known dimensional-analysis results and provides the number-unit decomposition Q = Π μ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dimensional Analysis is a Gauge Theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7JKTRPLN

@misc{pith2026260721695,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dimensional Analysis is a Gauge Theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7JKTRPLN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21695}
}
read the original abstract

I argue that dimensional analysis can appropriately be thought of as a gauge theory. This picture naturally leads to the usual quantity calculus through inherent properties of Lie groups, Lie algebras, and representation theory. The gauge theory interpretation is perhaps strongest for non-constant units. I explain how Stevens's classification of scales of measurement can be understood by choices of different gauge groups. Finally, I reinterpret and rephrase the Buckingham-{\Pi} Theorem in a way that also applies to typical gauge theories. Counting the number of ''{\Pi}''s becomes a well-known problem of invariant theory.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Baez, J. (2009). Torsors made easy .\\ https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/torsors.html https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/torsors.html [Accessed: July 2026]

    2009

  2. [2]

    and Seiberg, N

    Banks, T. and Seiberg, N. (2011). Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity . Phys. Rev. D. 83, 084019

    2011

  3. [3]

    V., Chakraborty, D., Parameswaran, S

    Bento, B. V., Chakraborty, D., Parameswaran, S. and Zavala, I. (2025). A guide to frames, 2 's, scales and corrections in string compactifications . Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34(10), 2530003

    2025

  4. [4]

    The International System of Units (SI)

    Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) (2019). The International System of Units (SI) . 9th ed. S\`evres: Bureau International des Poids et Mesures. https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/si-brochure https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/si-brochure

    2019

  5. [5]

    Bridgman, P. W. (1931). Dimensional Analysis . Revised. New Haven: Yale University Press

    1931

  6. [6]

    Buckingham, E. (1914). On Physically Similar Systems; Illustrations of the Use of Dimensional Equations . Physical Review 4(4), 345--376

    1914

  7. [7]

    Curry, S. N. and Gover, A. R. (2018). An Introduction to Conformal Geometry and Tractor Calculus, with a view to Applications in General Relativity . In: Daud\'e, T., H\"afner, D., and Nicolas, J.-P. (eds.), Asymptotic Analysis in General Relativity . London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 443. Cambridge University Press, 86--170

    2018

  8. [8]

    de Boer, J. (1995). On the History of Quantity Calculus and the International System . Metrologia 31(6), 405--429

    1995

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    De Clark, S. G. (2017). Qualitative vs Quantitative Conceptions of Homogeneity in Nineteenth Century Dimensional Analysis . Annals of Science 74(4), 299--325

    2017

  2. [10]

    Dewar, N. (2019). Sophistication about symmetries . The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70(2), 485--521

    2019

  3. [11]

    Dicke, R. H. (1962). Mach's principle and invariance under transformation of units . Phys. Rev. 125, 2163--2167

    1962

  4. [12]

    Domotor, Z. (2017). Torsor theory of physical quantities and their measurement . Measurement Science Review 17(4), 152--177

    2017

  5. [13]

    Eddington, A. S. (1921). A generalisation of Weyl's theory of the electromagnetic and gravitational fields . Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 99(697), 104--122

    1921

  6. [14]

    Eddington, A. S. (1923). The Mathematical Theory of Relativity . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    1923

  7. [15]

    Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa, T. (1916). On Mr. R. C. Tolman's ``Principle of Similitude.'' . Physical Review 8(1), 1--7

    1916

  8. [16]

    Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa, T. (1926). XVII. Dimensional Analysis Viewed from the Standpoint of the Theory of Similitudes . The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1(1), 257--272

    1926

  9. [17]

    Emerson, W. H. (2005). On the concept of dimension . Metrologia 42(4), L21--L22

    2005

  10. [18]

    and Nardone, P

    Faraoni, V., Gunzig, E. and Nardone, P. (1999). Conformal transformations in classical gravitational theories and in cosmology . Fund. Cosmic Phys. 20(2), 121--175

    1999

  11. [19]

    Fourier, J. (1878). The Analytical Theory of Heat . Translated by A. Freeman. Cambridge: University Press

  12. [20]

    and Pilaftsis, A

    Finn, K., Karamitsos, S. and Pilaftsis, A. (2020). Frame Covariance in Quantum Gravity . Phys. Rev. D. 102(4), 045014

    2020

  13. [21]

    Flanagan, E. E. (2004). The Conformal frame freedom in theories of gravitation . Class. Quant. Grav. 21, 3817--3829

    2004

  14. [22]

    and Tudball, C

    Gagliano, F. and Tudball, C. (2026). Decompactification Limits of Non-Compact Gauge Theory . [arXiv:2602.15680 https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15680]

    2026

  15. [23]

    Gomes, H. (2024). Gauge theory is about the geometry of internal spaces . [arXiv:2404.10461 https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10461]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gomes, H. (2025). Particles before symmetry . [arXiv:2509.25276 https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.25276]

    2025

  17. [25]

    Gomes, H. (2026). Making Symmetry Explicit: The Limits of Sophistication . [arXiv:2602.13708 https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.13708]

    2026

  18. [26]

    Gibbings, J. C. (1982). A Logic of Dimensional Analysis . Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 15(7), 1991--2002

    1982

  19. [27]

    Gibbings, J. C. (2011). Dimensional Analysis . London: Springer

    2011

  20. [28]

    Grozier, J. (2020). Should physical laws be unit-invariant? . Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 80, 9--18

    2020

  21. [29]

    Hall, B. D. (2022). The Problem with 'Dimensionless Quantities' . In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD 2022) . SCITEPRESS, 116--125

    2022

  22. [30]

    E., Manohar, A

    Hanany, A., Jenkins, E. E., Manohar, A. V. and Torri, G. (2011). Hilbert Series for Flavor Invariants of the Standard Model . JHEP 03, 096

    2011

  23. [31]

    and Murayama, H

    Henning, B., Lu, X., Melia, T. and Murayama, H. (2016). Hilbert series and operator bases with derivatives in effective field theories . Commun. Math. Phys. 347, 363--388

    2016

  24. [32]

    Jacobs, C. (2021). Invariance or equivalence: A tale of two principles . Synthese 199(3--4), 9337--9357

    2021

  25. [33]

    Jacobs, C. (2023a). The Metaphysics of Fibre Bundles . Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 97, 34--43

  26. [34]

    Jacobs, C. (2023b). The Nature of a Constant of Nature: The Case of G . Philosophy of Science 90(4), 797--816

  27. [35]

    Jacobs, C. (2024). In Defence of Dimensions . The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1086/729749 https://doi.org/10.1086/729749

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    Jalloh, M. (2024). Metaphysics and Convention in Dimensional Analysis, 1914--1917 . Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 14(2), 275--322

    2024

  29. [37]

    Jalloh, M. (2025). The -Theorem as a Guide to Quantity Symmetries and the Argument Against Absolutism . Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 14, Oxford University Press, 91--130

    2025

  30. [38]

    Jalloh, M. (2026). Tatiana Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa's Critical Contributions to Dimensional Analysis . [Preprint]. https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/30317/ https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/30317/

    2026

  31. [39]

    and Vitolo, R

    Jany s ka, J., Modugno, M. and Vitolo, R. (2007). Semi-vector spaces and units of measurement . [arXiv:0710.1313 https://arxiv.org/abs/0710.1313]

    2007 arXiv

  32. [40]

    and Vitolo, R

    Jany s ka, J., Modugno, M. and Vitolo, R. (2010). An Algebraic Approach to Physical Scales . Acta Appl. Math. 110, 1249--1276

    2010

  33. [41]

    Jarlskog, C. (1985). Commutator of the Quark Mass Matrices in the Standard Electroweak Model and a Measure of Maximal CP Nonconservation . Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1039--1042

    1985

  34. [42]

    and Karamitsos, S

    J\"arv, L. and Karamitsos, S. (2026). Frame invariant diffusive formulation of scalar-tensor gravity . [arXiv:2604.16094 https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.16094]

    2026 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Jenkins, E. E. and Manohar, A. V. (2009). Algebraic Structure of Lepton and Quark Flavor Invariants and CP Violation . JHEP 10, 094

    2009

  36. [44]

    and Pilaftsis, A

    Karamitsos, S. and Pilaftsis, A. (2018). Frame Covariant Nonminimal Multifield Inflation . Nucl. Phys. B 927, 219--254

    2018

  37. [45]

    and Muntz, B

    Karamitsos, S. and Muntz, B. (2025). From Frame Covariance to the Swampland Distance Conjecture . [arXiv:2512.07929 https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.07929]

    2025

  38. [46]

    and Nomizu, K

    Kobayashi, S. and Nomizu, K. (1963). Foundations of Differential Geometry. Vol. I . New York--London: Interscience Publishers, a division of John Wiley & Sons

    1963

  39. [47]

    and Vilson, O

    Kuusk, P., J\"arv, L. and Vilson, O. (2016). Invariant quantities in the multiscalar-tensor theories of gravitation . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 31(02n03), 1641003

    2016

  40. [48]

    and Martin, A

    Lehman, L. and Martin, A. (2015). Hilbert Series for Constructing Lagrangians: expanding the phenomenologist's toolbox . Phys. Rev. D. 91, 105014

    2015

  41. [49]

    and Martin, A

    Lehman, L. and Martin, A. (2016). Low-derivative operators of the Standard Model effective field theory via Hilbert series methods . JHEP 02, 081

    2016

  42. [50]

    Duncan (1978)

    Luce, R. Duncan (1978). Dimensionally invariant numerical laws correspond to meaningful qualitative relations . Philosophy of Science 45(1), 1--16

    1978

  43. [51]

    Maldacena, J. (2016). The symmetry and simplicity of the laws of physics and the Higgs boson . Eur. J. Phys. 37(1), 015802

    2016

  44. [52]

    Mitchell, D. J. (2017). Making Sense of Absolute Measurement: James Clerk Maxwell, William Thomson, Fleeming Jenkin, and the Invention of the Dimensional Formula . Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 58, 63--79

    2017

  45. [53]

    M ller-Nielsen, T. (2017). Invariance, Interpretation, and Motivation . Philosophy of Science 84(5), 1253--1264

    2017

  46. [54]

    and Luce, R

    Narens, L. and Luce, R. D. (1987). Meaningfulness and invariance . In: Eatwell, J., Milgate, M. and Newman, P. (eds.), The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economic Theory and Doctrine . Macmillan Press, 417--421

    1987

  47. [55]

    Poincar\'e, H. (1906). La relativit\'e de l'espace . L'Ann\'ee psychologique 13, 1--17. (English translation: The Relativity of Space , translated by G. B. Halsted, The Monist 23(2), 161--180 (1913))

    1906

  48. [56]

    and De Arcia, R

    Quiros, I. and De Arcia, R. (2018). On local scale invariance and the questionable theoretical basis of the conformal transformations' issue . [arXiv:1811.02458 https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.02458]

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Raposo, \'A. P. (2018). The Algebraic Structure of Quantity Calculus . Measurement Science Review, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Measurement Sciences, 18(4), 147--157

    2018

  50. [58]

    Raposo, \'A. P. (2019). The Algebraic Structure of Quantity Calculus II: Dimensional Analysis and Differential and Integral Calculus . Measurement Science Review, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Measurement Sciences, 19(2), 70--78

    2019

  51. [59]

    The Principle of Similitude

    Rayleigh, Lord (1915). The Principle of Similitude . Nature 95, 66--68

    1915

  52. [60]

    Roche, J. J. (1998). The mathematics of measurement: A critical history . London: Athlone Press

    1998

  53. [61]

    Schwarz, G. W. (1975). Smooth functions invariant under the action of a compact Lie group . Topology 14(1), 63--68

    1975

  54. [62]

    Skow, B. (2017). The Metaphysics of Quantities and Their Dimensions . Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 10, 171--198

    2017

  55. [63]

    Sterrett, S. G. (2009). Similarity and dimensional analysis . In: Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Elsevier, 799--823

    2009

  56. [64]

    Sterrett, S. G. (2021). Dimensions . In: The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Physics, 666--678

    2021

  57. [65]

    Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement . Science 103(2684), 677--680

    1946

  58. [66]

    Tao, T. (2012). A mathematical formalisation of dimensional analysis .\\ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/a-mathematical-formalisation-of-dimensional-analysis/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/a-mathematical-formalisation-of-dimensional-analysis/ [Accessed: J...

    2012

  59. [67]

    Uzan, J.-P. (2025). Fundamental constants: from measurement to the universe, a window on gravitation and cosmology . Living Rev. Rel. 28(1), 6

    2025

  60. [68]

    at . Sitzungsberichte der K\

    Weyl, H. (1918). Gravitation und Elektrizit\"at . Sitzungsberichte der K\"oniglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 465--480. (English translation: Gravitation and electricity , in O'Raifeartaigh (1997), The dawning of gauge theory . Princeton, NJ: Princeton...

    1918

  61. [69]

    Young, K. (1999). Foreign exchange market as a lattice gauge theory . Am. J. Phys. 67, 862--868

    1999

  62. [70]

    Zapata-Carratal\'a, C. (2022). Dimensioned Algebra: Mathematics with Physical Quantities . La Matematica 1, 849--885

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.