Post Reply 
Asterisks are not Sexy
04-20-2016, 09:36 AM
Post: #8
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy
(04-20-2016 08:30 AM)retoa Wrote:  The SI (the international system of units) defines as the only accepted symbol for the multiplication between two numbers the cross. See the complete SI brochure on page 134 (english) or 45 (french).

http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/si-b...nload.html

I really don't see why we should use something different if it is already internationally defined.

Sec 5.1 of your (English) reference, page 130 seems to be at odds with your conclusion:

"In forming products and quotients of unit symbols the normal rules of algebraic
multiplication or division apply. Multiplication must be indicated by a space or a
half-high (centred) dot (⋅), since otherwise some prefixes could be misinterpreted as a unit symbol." (My emphasis).

I first encountered the asterisk symbol for multiplication when using MITS Altair BASIC. Asterisk, instead of X, was to avoid operator vs. variable ambiguity. In complicated formulae, the asterisk seems to be quite clear (to me) as a multiplication operator, more so than other indications. I vote to keep the asterisk.

-Dale-
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Asterisks are not Sexy - sguth - 04-19-2016, 04:03 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - eried - 04-19-2016, 05:45 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Gilles - 04-19-2016, 05:59 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Tim Wessman - 04-19-2016, 08:35 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - informach - 04-20-2016, 12:31 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - TASP - 04-20-2016, 01:25 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-20-2016, 08:30 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - DrD - 04-20-2016 09:36 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-20-2016, 12:07 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - DrD - 04-20-2016, 04:05 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-21-2016, 09:02 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Fortin - 04-20-2016, 11:49 AM



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)