Terry Pratchett wrote that Knowledge = Power = Energy = Matter = Mass. Physicists don’t agree because the units don’t match up.

Physicists check equations with a powerful technique called “Dimensional Analysis,” but it’s only theoretically related to the “travel in space and time” kinds of dimension we discussed earlier.

It all started with Newton’s mechanics, his study of how objects affect the motion of other objects. His vocabulary list included words like *force, momentum, velocity, acceleration, mass,* …, all concepts that seem familiar to us but which Newton either originated or fundamentally re-defined. As time went on, other thinkers added more terms like *power, energy* and *action*.

They’re all linked mathematically by various equations, but also by three fundamental **dimensions**: *length* (*L*), *time* (*T*) and *mass* (*M*). (There are a few others, like electric charge and temperature, that apply to problems outside of mechanics proper.)

**Velocity**, for example. (Strictly speaking, velocity is speed in a particular direction but here we’re just concerned with its magnitude.) You can measure it in miles per hour or millimeters per second or parsecs per millennium — in each case it’s length per time. Velocity’s dimension expression is *L/T* no matter what units you use.

**Momentum** is the product of mass and velocity. A 6,000-lb Escalade SUV doing 60 miles an hour has twice the momentum of a 3,000-lb compact car traveling at the same speed. (Insurance companies are well aware of that fact and charge accordingly.) In terms of dimensions, momentum is *M*(L/T) = ML/T*.

**Acceleration** is how rapidly velocity changes — a car clocked at “zero to 60 in 6 seconds” accelerated an average of 10 miles per hour per second. Time’s in the denominator twice (who cares what the units are?), so the dimensional expression for acceleration is *L/T*^{2}.

Physicists and chemists and engineers pay attention to these dimensional expressions because they have to match up across an equal sign. Everyone knows Einstein’s equation, *E = mc ^{2}*. The

*c*is the velocity of light. As a velocity its dimension expression is L/T. Therefore, the expression for

**energy**must be

*M*(L/T)*=

^{2}*ML*. See how easy?

^{2}/T^{2}Now things get more interesting. Newton’s original Second Law calculated force on an object by how rapidly its momentum changed: *(ML/T)/T*. Later on (possibly influenced by his feud with Liebniz about who invented calculus), he changed that to mass times acceleration *M*(L/T ^{2})*. Conceptually they’re different but dimensionally they’re identical — both expressions for

**force**work out to

*ML/T*.

^{2}Something seductively similar seems to apply to Heisenberg’s Area. As we’ve seen, it’s the product of uncertainties in position (*L*) and momentum (*ML/T*) so the Area’s dimension expression works out to *L*(ML/T) = ML ^{2}/T*.

There is another way to get the same dimension expression but things aren’t not as nice there as they look at first glance. **Action** is given by the amount of energy expended in a given time interval, times the length of that interval. If you take the product of energy and time the dimensions work out as *(ML ^{2}/T^{2})*T = ML^{2}/T*, just like Heisenberg’s Area.

It’s so tempting to think that energy and time negotiate precision like position and momentum do. But they don’t. In quantum mechanics, time is a driver, not a result. If you tell me when an event happens (the *t*-coordinate), I can maybe calculate its energy and such. But if you tell me the energy, I can’t give you a time when it’ll happen. The situation reminds me of geologists trying to predict an earthquake. They’ve got lots of statistics on tremor size distribution and can even give you average time between tremors of a certain size, but when will the next one hit? Lord only knows.

File the detailed reasoning under “Arcane” — in technicalese, there are operators for position, momentum and energy but there’s no operator for time. If you’re curious, John Baez’s paper has all the details. Be warned, it contains equations!

Trust me — if you’ve spent a couple of days going through a long derivation, totting up the dimensions on either side of equations along the way is a great technique for reassuring yourself that you probably didn’t do something stupid back at hour 14. Or maybe to detect that you did.

~~ Rich Olcott