Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 22, 2013:

equations 2.3-4,5,6 http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg76/commiedread/Schuumlt...

Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 22, 2013:

Bezugsgröße doesn't appear anywhere in the text. The relation of Bezugsgröße and bezogene Größe is that one relates to the other. So, it seems to me using reference quantity would be wrong. Specific quantities are bezogene Größen, but also functions of state and so on. Maybe I just need to pick one of them in each case, because maybe this summarising term bezogene Größe doesn't exist...?
I will try to post the equations....

Cilian O'Tuama Apr 21, 2013:

Bezugsgröße Personally I'd much prefer "reference" to "referencing".
I understand BG here to mean sth. like Referenzgrößen, die als Maßstab für Vergleichszwecke dienen.

It's definitely not extensive properties, because they're being replaced by (o. expressed as) Bezugsgrößen in your text.
But dividing an extensive prop by an intensive prop (e.g. mass) gives another int. prop. So words like "unit", "reference" or your own "specific" spring to mind if BG in your text means expressing it in absolute terms.
It might help if we could see equations (2.3-4,5,6).
It might not.

Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 20, 2013:

Since Bezugsgröße means reference quantity and it's sort of the opposite of bezogene Größe, I'm probably going to go with referencing quantity. Any thoughts or opinions?

Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 17, 2013:

:) thx

Cilian O'Tuama Apr 16, 2013:

Thanks for that, Max I'll now remove you from my personal list of filtered askers. Not that the world will notice :-)

Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 16, 2013:

I'm sorry I gave that impression, the answers were certainly helpful. It's just that the client wasn't happy with the suggestions when I referred them. He objected especially to parameter, and only slowly grasps the idea that not every German term has an exact English counterpart. As seen in this case, where Größe can be translated as function, factor, property or quantity, which makes it difficult to choose one when you have to assemble a term yourself, because it can't be found in any dictionary. Also, I myself only just start to notice that scientific German is way more precise in its terminology than scientific English.
In short, when he told me which term to use, I did so, since, after all, I'm not a physicist. Now, in hindsight, I see I should have explained back then, thinking more about you guys then about my work. Sorry for that, I certainly didn't want to offend anyone, your help was certainly appreciated (and always is, this is an awesome community).

Cilian O'Tuama Apr 15, 2013:

closed without grading - answer found elsewhere Max, Your "closed without grading - answer found elsewhere" is interpreted by some willing helpers to mean that their contributions were in no way helpful. Sensitive souls might see it as a slap in the face. So maybe their willingness to help will be somewhat diminished next time.
Just to answer your question as to why I posted the link.

Max Hellwig (asker) Apr 15, 2013:

Bezogene Größen können spezifische Größen sein, aber eben nicht nur. Parameter und magnitude passen hier nicht, physikalische Größen sind m.E. properties.
Cilian, I'm not quite sure why you posted that link...

Cilian O'Tuama Apr 15, 2013:

closed without grading - answer found elsewhere http://www.proz.com/kudoz/german_to_english/physics/5087654-...

Coqueiro Apr 15, 2013:

Das sind m.W. Größen wie die Dichte (bezogen auf eine Volumeneinheit) oder die spezifische Wärmekapazität (bezogen auf eine Masseneinheit) - also vielleicht so etwas wie specific parameters.