Dimensional Analysis as a First Check

Every equation must be dimensionally consistent; checking units is the fastest way to catch a wrong result before it spreads.

Units close, or the result is wrong

Dimensional analysis is the cheapest form of verification we have. If the units on the two sides of an expression do not match, the expression is wrong, full stop, regardless of how physical the numbers look. We treat a units mismatch as a hard failure in review, not a rounding concern.

Scaling arguments before detailed models

Before running a detailed simulation, we estimate the answer from dimensional grouping and characteristic scales. If the detailed result disagrees with the scaling estimate by an order of magnitude, one of them is wrong and we find out which before trusting either. This is how a peak field of 16.84 T or a fusion power near 88.7 MW is first bracketed: the order of magnitude has to be defensible from scaling alone.

Non-dimensional numbers travel; dimensional ones do not

Plasma and engineering behaviour is governed by dimensionless groups. Framing a result in dimensionless form makes it comparable across machines and across scales, and exposes when a claim depends on an unstated dimensional coincidence. When we extrapolate the burner (Aegis / MetroVolt) plug regime, we do it in dimensionless terms and report how far outside measured ground the groups sit.

None of this replaces detailed analysis. It disciplines it. A result that survives dimensional and scaling checks has earned the right to be computed carefully; a result that fails them has not. Because it needs no simulation and no data, it is also the one check we can run on someone else's claim as easily as our own -- a wrong-dimensioned result is refutable on sight, whoever made it.