This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I edited the mho reference to state that mho is used in addition to the SI unit of Siemens. Mho has not fallen out of use in all fields, especially electrical engineering. Nicholas SL Smith chatter 02:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't R = V/I be in it somewhere? In that simple form.
What about Ohm's law should that be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.22.59 ( talk) 16:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
do we really need three ohm different characters? PeregrineAY 02:34, 2005 Apr 6 (UTC)
Seems to me that most communication, computer and scientific systems are still restricted to ASCII for the forseeable future and in those the common notation for the ohm unit is to use the capital letter R or Z (also used for Impedance generally). This is obvious general knowledge to anyone working in any technical field but shouldn't he article mention this? Anyone know where to find citation for this ? (other than me :P ) -- Miikka Raninen ( talk) 07:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I have edited this part on the basis of the following
Google hits (august 2005) kilohm OR kilohms 12,300 23,800 kiloohm OR kiloohms 7,180 8,440 "kilo-ohm" OR "kilo-ohms" 10,900 "kilo-ohm" 6,350 "kilo-ohms" 5,470 megaohm OR megaohms 22,600 23,200 megohm OR megohms 92,900 99,800 "mega-ohm" OR "mega-ohms" 11,600 gigaohm OR gigaohms 7,680 7,490 gigohm OR gigohms 1,250 853 "giga-ohm" OR "giga-ohms" 849 teraohm OR teraohms 1,350 693 terohm OR terohms 40 55
Gene Nygaard 05:43, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC) Urhixidur 00:23, 2005 August 22 (UTC) (for the August 2005 counts)
The result of the debate was move back, of course. — Nightst a llion (?) Seen this already? 19:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Seems like a clear case of primary topic disambiguation. -- SPUI ( talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 03:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Ohm was in line with Becquerel, Celsius, Coulomb, Farad, Hertz, Joule, Newton, Pascal, Sievert, Volt, Watt, which are all primary topics about the unit. Gray redirects to Grey with the color as the primary topic. Henry, Weber, Siemens also have notable other uses and are disambiguation pages. Tesla redirects to Nikola Tesla. — Articles about people are available under their proper names. Someone looking for Georg or Martin will find them just as well through a dablink. Disambiguation on last names is a navigational help, not a criterion to decide whether a topic is primary. There are no other notable things called "Ohm"! (*)
There wasn't consensus either to move Ohm to Ohm (unit), was there? What is this move all about? As to the consensus argument, I think "no such consensus" does not mean that primary topic disambiguations may be overturned by any possible minority. There are Fiona Apple and Charlie Apple: does Apple have to be moved to Apple (fruit)? Femto 13:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I've heard that the unit Ohm should be capitalized at all times since it is derived from a family name. Is that true? If not, was it ever true in the past? Binksternet ( talk) 21:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I was just researching ohm for my antenna strength. Not sure what 75-ohm means. After reading this article I still don't. I imagine a section about the use of ohm in consumer electronics might be a nice addition to this article. thanks Dkriegls ( talk) 16:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Start with [1]. The British Association report is on the Internet Archive, though probably too primary a source to be a good reference here. Talk about origins of the unit - starting with telegraphers, various empirical standards, the CGS "absolute" units, magnetic vs. electrostatic units, metrology, practical realizable standards, artifact standards, 20th century redefinitions, then the modern definition. Talk about the struggle to make E=IR and P=IV true by consistent definitions of volt, ohm, amp, and watt. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 17:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the definition section needs to be rewritten so that it is easily understandable. After reading it five or so times, I still don't get what an ohm is. Kevin chen2003 ( talk) 21:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
From a physics point of view I would strongly suggest to add "" to the first equation, since in this way it becomes obvious that the resistance quantum has the same units, see Conductance_quantum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.187.160.240 ( talk) 13:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
using P=I^2 * R, it seems that the Ohm should have units of ...s^-1, not ...s^-3. since [P]=J/s and [I]^2 = C^2/s, then [R] = [P]/[I]^2 = (J/s)/(C^2/s^2) = J*s/C^2 = kg*m^2/(C*s) 129.93.4.35 ( talk) 22:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
and I should add that the above section's author came to the same conclusion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.4.35 ( talk) 22:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm now in a short, vocational course of electronics, and in that class, many circuit diagrams using ϵ and E for Ohm. But this was very surprising , because in Wikipedia, and any textbooks I could-not found this use, and its basis. But I found mention in several Websites such as https://www.quora.com/What-does-1E-2E2-220E-4E7-470E-4K7-2K2-2M2-6K8-8K2-means-in-a-mixed-pack-of-resistor , http://www.edaboard.com/thread67699.html , http://learn.mikroe.com/ebooks/componentsofelectronicdevices/chapter/introduction-to-resistors/ , ( The last-one also tells R is also used). The first-one website also tells 4E7 = 4.7 Ohm. (That also confuses me, because we often write 4E7 = 4 X 10 ^7 ). But these websites do-not clearly mention the origin of these conventions, and do-not cite reference.
So, to improve the article, please provide further information about Symbols for Ohm, other-than capital-letter-Omega (Ω), their origins, uses etc. Thanks. RIT RAJARSHI ( talk) 12:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ohm/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Basic scientific style: No symbols are self-explanatory. Science has more parameters than the number of letters in the alphabet, and 'm', 's' etc. should be explained: "'m' is the distance,'s' is the time and so forth. |
Last edited at 08:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 01:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Can't we have the proper (or most common) forms listed in the article, especially as "kilohm" and "megohm" might be some of the few exceptions to the general rules (presuming it is actually "kilohm" and "megohm")?
Article Hertz has it both in the lead (kilohertz, megahertz, gigahertz, and terahertz) and in the sub section SI multiples.
OK, some of them are mentioned inside a sentence at the end of section Definition. What about a more prominent place (e.g. in the lead or a separate subsection)?
FYI: The Chicago Manual of Style has in 10.57 (16th edition, 2010):
-- Mortense ( talk) 07:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
About the statement in the article: "In documents printed before WWII the unit symbol often consisted of the raised lowercase omega (ω), such that 56 Ω was written as 56ω." This can be traced back to William Henry Preece in 1867. [3] He used the lowercase ω for ohm, and the capital Ω for megaohm. Ceinturion ( talk) 14:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I edited the mho reference to state that mho is used in addition to the SI unit of Siemens. Mho has not fallen out of use in all fields, especially electrical engineering. Nicholas SL Smith chatter 02:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't R = V/I be in it somewhere? In that simple form.
What about Ohm's law should that be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.22.59 ( talk) 16:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
do we really need three ohm different characters? PeregrineAY 02:34, 2005 Apr 6 (UTC)
Seems to me that most communication, computer and scientific systems are still restricted to ASCII for the forseeable future and in those the common notation for the ohm unit is to use the capital letter R or Z (also used for Impedance generally). This is obvious general knowledge to anyone working in any technical field but shouldn't he article mention this? Anyone know where to find citation for this ? (other than me :P ) -- Miikka Raninen ( talk) 07:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I have edited this part on the basis of the following
Google hits (august 2005) kilohm OR kilohms 12,300 23,800 kiloohm OR kiloohms 7,180 8,440 "kilo-ohm" OR "kilo-ohms" 10,900 "kilo-ohm" 6,350 "kilo-ohms" 5,470 megaohm OR megaohms 22,600 23,200 megohm OR megohms 92,900 99,800 "mega-ohm" OR "mega-ohms" 11,600 gigaohm OR gigaohms 7,680 7,490 gigohm OR gigohms 1,250 853 "giga-ohm" OR "giga-ohms" 849 teraohm OR teraohms 1,350 693 terohm OR terohms 40 55
Gene Nygaard 05:43, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC) Urhixidur 00:23, 2005 August 22 (UTC) (for the August 2005 counts)
The result of the debate was move back, of course. — Nightst a llion (?) Seen this already? 19:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Seems like a clear case of primary topic disambiguation. -- SPUI ( talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 03:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Ohm was in line with Becquerel, Celsius, Coulomb, Farad, Hertz, Joule, Newton, Pascal, Sievert, Volt, Watt, which are all primary topics about the unit. Gray redirects to Grey with the color as the primary topic. Henry, Weber, Siemens also have notable other uses and are disambiguation pages. Tesla redirects to Nikola Tesla. — Articles about people are available under their proper names. Someone looking for Georg or Martin will find them just as well through a dablink. Disambiguation on last names is a navigational help, not a criterion to decide whether a topic is primary. There are no other notable things called "Ohm"! (*)
There wasn't consensus either to move Ohm to Ohm (unit), was there? What is this move all about? As to the consensus argument, I think "no such consensus" does not mean that primary topic disambiguations may be overturned by any possible minority. There are Fiona Apple and Charlie Apple: does Apple have to be moved to Apple (fruit)? Femto 13:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I've heard that the unit Ohm should be capitalized at all times since it is derived from a family name. Is that true? If not, was it ever true in the past? Binksternet ( talk) 21:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I was just researching ohm for my antenna strength. Not sure what 75-ohm means. After reading this article I still don't. I imagine a section about the use of ohm in consumer electronics might be a nice addition to this article. thanks Dkriegls ( talk) 16:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Start with [1]. The British Association report is on the Internet Archive, though probably too primary a source to be a good reference here. Talk about origins of the unit - starting with telegraphers, various empirical standards, the CGS "absolute" units, magnetic vs. electrostatic units, metrology, practical realizable standards, artifact standards, 20th century redefinitions, then the modern definition. Talk about the struggle to make E=IR and P=IV true by consistent definitions of volt, ohm, amp, and watt. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 17:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the definition section needs to be rewritten so that it is easily understandable. After reading it five or so times, I still don't get what an ohm is. Kevin chen2003 ( talk) 21:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
From a physics point of view I would strongly suggest to add "" to the first equation, since in this way it becomes obvious that the resistance quantum has the same units, see Conductance_quantum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.187.160.240 ( talk) 13:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
using P=I^2 * R, it seems that the Ohm should have units of ...s^-1, not ...s^-3. since [P]=J/s and [I]^2 = C^2/s, then [R] = [P]/[I]^2 = (J/s)/(C^2/s^2) = J*s/C^2 = kg*m^2/(C*s) 129.93.4.35 ( talk) 22:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
and I should add that the above section's author came to the same conclusion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.4.35 ( talk) 22:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm now in a short, vocational course of electronics, and in that class, many circuit diagrams using ϵ and E for Ohm. But this was very surprising , because in Wikipedia, and any textbooks I could-not found this use, and its basis. But I found mention in several Websites such as https://www.quora.com/What-does-1E-2E2-220E-4E7-470E-4K7-2K2-2M2-6K8-8K2-means-in-a-mixed-pack-of-resistor , http://www.edaboard.com/thread67699.html , http://learn.mikroe.com/ebooks/componentsofelectronicdevices/chapter/introduction-to-resistors/ , ( The last-one also tells R is also used). The first-one website also tells 4E7 = 4.7 Ohm. (That also confuses me, because we often write 4E7 = 4 X 10 ^7 ). But these websites do-not clearly mention the origin of these conventions, and do-not cite reference.
So, to improve the article, please provide further information about Symbols for Ohm, other-than capital-letter-Omega (Ω), their origins, uses etc. Thanks. RIT RAJARSHI ( talk) 12:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ohm/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Basic scientific style: No symbols are self-explanatory. Science has more parameters than the number of letters in the alphabet, and 'm', 's' etc. should be explained: "'m' is the distance,'s' is the time and so forth. |
Last edited at 08:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 01:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Can't we have the proper (or most common) forms listed in the article, especially as "kilohm" and "megohm" might be some of the few exceptions to the general rules (presuming it is actually "kilohm" and "megohm")?
Article Hertz has it both in the lead (kilohertz, megahertz, gigahertz, and terahertz) and in the sub section SI multiples.
OK, some of them are mentioned inside a sentence at the end of section Definition. What about a more prominent place (e.g. in the lead or a separate subsection)?
FYI: The Chicago Manual of Style has in 10.57 (16th edition, 2010):
-- Mortense ( talk) 07:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
About the statement in the article: "In documents printed before WWII the unit symbol often consisted of the raised lowercase omega (ω), such that 56 Ω was written as 56ω." This can be traced back to William Henry Preece in 1867. [3] He used the lowercase ω for ohm, and the capital Ω for megaohm. Ceinturion ( talk) 14:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)