Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Kilogram Has Gained Weight
LiveScience ^ | 06 January 2013 07:43 PM ET | Tia Ghose

Posted on 01/07/2013 8:47:48 AM PST by Olog-hai

The kilogram may need to go on a diet. The international standard, a cylinder-shaped hunk of metal that defines the fundamental unit of mass, has gained tens of micrograms in weight from surface contamination, according to a new study.

As a result, each country that has one of these standard masses has a slightly different definition of the kilogram, which could throw off science experiments that require very precise weight measurements or international trade in highly restricted items that are restricted by weight, such as radioactive materials.

But ozone and ultraviolet light could be used to clean the kilograms without damaging them, the research suggests. …

(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Science
KEYWORDS: kilogram; metricsystem; standards
Didn’t they say that the standard kilogram was losing weight a couple of years ago . . . ?
1 posted on 01/07/2013 8:47:53 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Didn’t they say that the standard kilogram was losing weight a couple of years ago . . . ?

Kilogram Is Losing Weight: Redefine Kilogram Based On Universal Constants, Scientists Urge

2 posted on 01/07/2013 8:55:30 AM PST by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mjp

That’s it all right. Saw some links to FR threads from ‘07 and ‘09 on the same subject as well. All measurements are wrong, like my quantitative analysis professor told me . . .


3 posted on 01/07/2013 8:57:51 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
About thirty years ago, when I was in the seafood biz, the standard pack for shrimp was five pound blocks....

Then along came imports from Asia and the western Pacific, packed in 2 kilo blocks (4.4 pounds).....more than one dealer would repack/remark those and pick up the difference as pure profit.

All these blocks were cased in block ice, so the takeaway wasn't so obvious.

Definite "weight gain"!

4 posted on 01/07/2013 9:00:07 AM PST by ErnBatavia (Piffle....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

If the Standard kilogram has gained weight (mass), then I have lost a corresponding amount. Hooray!


5 posted on 01/07/2013 9:10:42 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Weight and mass are two different things. The kilogram is a unit of mass, and is the only fundamental physical quantity still defined by an artifact.


6 posted on 01/07/2013 9:20:00 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Obama: Brought to you by the letter "O" and the number 16 trillion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Another misleading headline. The Kilogram has not gained weight. The Kilogram is a weight, not an object.

Also, if this object is the standard by which all other weight measurements are verified, then I have to ask, how can anyone verify the weight of this object?


7 posted on 01/07/2013 9:25:10 AM PST by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back
Also, if this object is the standard by which all other weight measurements are verified, then I have to ask, how can anyone verify the weight of this object?

Exactly. To what do you calibrate the instrument you use to measure the standard?

8 posted on 01/07/2013 9:35:44 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

Actually, the kilogram is supposed to be a standard mass rather than weight, if you can believe that. Thus in a weightless environment, it’s supposed to still consist of one kilogram of mass although weighing nothing. (The English System equivalent is the slug, which on Earth weighs 32 pounds; weight is a force, specifically the force exerted on a mass by gravity.) Problem with mass is that the only way to keep it constant is to guarantee that your original standard mass still has all of its atoms from the time it was forged and standardized (as it were), and there’s no way to do that.

And yes, if the standard is off, then all derivative standards are off.

In the USA, it’s up to Congress to set standards of weights and measures (per Article 1 section 8 paragraph 5 of the Constitution); that’s the main reason why we haven’t adopted a foreign system such as the so-called “Système Internationale”.


9 posted on 01/07/2013 9:46:52 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

Calibration . . . the fly in the ointment when it comes to how the “average global warming” has been measured over the past 100 years by different types of thermometers that cannot be calibrated all the same way. Add to that the unscientific “averaging” of temperatures around the globe, and your single degree Celsius of alleged “average warming” over such a long period of time becomes utterly meaningless and unavoidably questionable.

Never mind the alleged fluctuations of the weight of the standard kilogram. How do the scientists know that the earth’s gravity itself has not varied by a few degrees of force? It has not necessarily been established that a certain mass has to exert a uniform force of gravitational attraction after all.


10 posted on 01/07/2013 9:53:44 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
But ozone and ultraviolet light could be used to clean the kilograms without damaging them, the research suggests.

Oh heck, just run over to Autozone and get some automotive rubbing compound and that should take care of it real quick, no big deal, it'll just buff right out :)

11 posted on 01/07/2013 9:58:49 AM PST by The Cajun (Sarah Palin, Mark Levin......Nuff said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Actually, we have adopted the Systeme Internationale. Our commonly used measurements have defined in terms of the international units ever since The Mendenhall Order in 1893. An inch is defined as 0.0254m. The second is also standardized throughout the world.
12 posted on 01/07/2013 10:05:53 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The earth’s gravity is increasing as space dust and meteors are constantly added to the total mass of the earth.


13 posted on 01/07/2013 10:13:43 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: reg45

Oops: “have defined” should be “have been defined”.


14 posted on 01/07/2013 10:20:01 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: reg45

Not to mention the population increase each year :).


15 posted on 01/07/2013 10:26:17 AM PST by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: reg45

That’s not congressional, so it would be unconstitutional.


16 posted on 01/07/2013 10:35:41 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Odd that a science magazine would get the terminology so wrong.

A kilogram is a unit of MASS
Weight is a form of FORCE

The standard kilogram would have zero weight in space, but would still be one kilogram even without gravity.


17 posted on 01/07/2013 10:43:22 AM PST by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd
Yes; that does give LiveScience a black eye. The unit of force (FTSOA, weight) in the metric system is the newton—about 9.8 newtons per kg on earth, therefore you have 4.45 lbs per newton on earth.
18 posted on 01/07/2013 10:52:06 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reg45
The earth’s gravity is increasing as space dust and meteors are constantly added to the total mass of the earth.

Yes, but we're losing mass as we lose atmosphere. I think it's a net gain, but there are multiple processes working no the total mass of the system.

19 posted on 01/07/2013 10:57:22 AM PST by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: reg45
Some scientists claim that the earth is losing more mass than it’s gaining, especially via the escape of hydrogen and helium from the planet’s gravity well into space. The estimated 50,000 metric tons of that loss offsets the 40,000 metric tons of mass gained from space dust et cetera, per that set of calculations.
20 posted on 01/07/2013 10:59:59 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
In the USA, it’s up to Congress to set standards of weights and measures (per Article 1 section 8 paragraph 5 of the Constitution); that’s the main reason why we haven’t adopted a foreign system such as the so-called “Système Internationale”.

No, really it's the (understandable) stubbornness of the people. We don't want SI, so we don't use it. Except 2 liters of pop. Cause that's bigger than 2 quarts.

21 posted on 01/07/2013 11:00:13 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

However, the Metric Act of 1866 had made the use of the Metric System a legal standard in the United States. As far as I know, that act and the subsequent Treaty of The Metre (1875) had established the Metric System as an official standard of the United States. Adams and Jefferson had attempted to establish it as the official standard of the country but no official action was taken until the 1866 act.


22 posted on 01/07/2013 11:33:41 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson