This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofPhysics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Measurement, a project which is currently considered to bedefunct.MeasurementWikipedia:WikiProject MeasurementTemplate:WikiProject MeasurementMeasurement
I have just modified 2 external links onHertz. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
I have just modified 2 external links onHertz. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.
The bottom light should blink with 2 Hz, but one full on-off cycle takes 1 second, so it is actually 1 Hz. The definition of Hertz is for full cycles, not half cycles, so while it is true that the light is on for 0.5 seconds, that doesn't make the frequency 2 Hz.130.75.213.44 (talk)10:53, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This week the gif creator again added a gif that has wrong speeds. So I replaced it with the old image that was used until July 2020. It is used on numerous pages.63.226.236.153 (talk)09:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"one per second" is a very awkward phrase that is not implied by "1 s-1" and that makes the reader ask "one what?" "Cycle" is appropriate because Hertz is a unit of frequency and cycle is a generic term for whatever is repeating that has a frequency. "Cycle per second" is also the standard dictionary definition. "1 s-1" is not a definition but an SI equivalent, as shown in the infobox.Danstronger (talk)17:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Four points:
It would be correct to say that the numerical value of frequency, when expressed in hertz, is equal to the number of cycles per second, but that statement does not make the cycle a unit. Standardization bodies like BIPM and NIST do not mention the "cycle" and instead state that 1 Hz is equal 1 s^-1. In a sloppy kind of way it's OK to say they are the same, but sloppiness is not what I seek in an encyclopaedia. We should be precise.
It hasn’t always been that way. There was a time when “cycle per second” (cps) was considered a unit, complete with kilocycle per second (kcps), megacycle per second (Mcps) and so on. But such units are obsolete and the article should make that clear.
"One per second" isprecisely what is meant by 1 s-1 (in the same way that "one metre" is meant by 1 m). What else would it mean?
It’s clear to me that Boppennoppy is trying to improve the article, making changes that are substantiated by reference to international standards. I understand your point of view as well (though I do not agree with it), but just because you are in a majority does not make you right. I suggest we seek a form of words that acknowledges both the precise definition (citing BIPM andNIST), and the sloppy one (citing whichever sources you consider appropriate).
I know it's not exactly what you wanted but I added a sentence about hertz being an SI derived unit (which I agree is important) to the lead. I think it's important to distinguish between adefinition, which is explanatory English, and an "expression in terms of SI base units" which is the column heading in the NIST reference. Both have their virtues, but "cycle" is part of the definition, even if it's "not a unit", and I think it's correct for the article to start with a definition.Danstronger (talk)18:52, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Many people, when they read "one per second", have a natural tendency to ask (themselves), "onewhat per second?" And the associated tendency is to insert some general term for a periodic event such as "cycle". But consider a digital readout on a clock showing the number of seconds passing since some starting time. Thenumber on the display is increasing at a rate of ONE per second—which makes perfectly good sense. Since (temporal) frequency is the quotient of thenumber of periodic events and the corresponding elapsedtime, the dimension isnumber/time,1/T, where "1" is the symbol for the dimensionnumber, to be shown in the same special font (e.g. Helvetica) as that used for other dimension symbols. [It isnot the numeral 1.] The SI (implicit) "unit" for (the quantity) number is one, 1. For time, it is second, s. So the SI unit for frequency is 1/s or "one per second", also written as s–1.
By the way, the same "problem" occurs with quantities like number density: number per volume. Some people will ask (themselves) "number ofwhat per volume?" And will have an urge to insert some "downstream-from-the-SI" symbol such as mcl (molecule), pcl (particle), or some other descriptive symbol—analogous to inserting cyl (cycle) in the case of frequency. If we are dealing with number density, the correct unit is 1/m3, "one per cubic metre", or m–3. On the other hand, if we are dealing with amount density, the appropriate unit is "entities per cubic metre", ent/m3 or ent m–3, where "ent" stands for one entity—whichshould be recognised as the appropriate atomic-scale unit for amount, paralleling the dalton for mass. One mole is exactly 6.02214076 x 1023 ent. The Avogadro constant (not number) isexactly 1/ent, one per entity.
[I have been trying to get ent recognised as the appropriate atomic-scale unit for amount for over a decade. The atomic-scale unit for amount-specific ("molar") mass is then Da/ent, which, for all practical purposes, is identical to g/mol and kg/kmol. But that is another long story.]Boppennoppy (talk)16:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The relationship between angular velocity,ω, with unit rad/s, and rotational frequency,f, with unit Hz (1/s), is universally given as:
ω = 2πf
which is dimensionallyincorrect, with amismatch of units: rad/s on the LHS and 1/s on the RHS. The rotational frequency is the time rate of change of the number of revolutions,Nrev =θ/rev, whereθ is the angular displacement andrev is an angle of one revolution. Thus:
f = dNrev/dt = d(θ/rev)/dt = (dθ/dt)/rev =ω/rev =ω/(2π rad)
So the dimensionally correct (and consistent-unit) relationship is:
ω =rev f = (2π rad)f
Note that, for numerical values in consistent units:
In other words, it is thenumerical values ofω andf (when expressed in rad/s and Hz, respectively) that are related by the ubiquitous formula, not the physical quantities themselves.
PS The well-known formula is "correct" in SI units, where the so-called "angular velocity" is the physical angular velocity divided by one radian—in other words, the time rate of change of thenumber of radians, with unit 1/s (butnot Hz).
level-4 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
The redirectRevolutions per hour has been listed atredirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets theredirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 17 § Revolutions per hour until a consensus is reached.Rusalkii (talk)21:17, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply].jpg)
