Skip to comments.The Kilogram Has Gained Weight
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 ...
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 . . .
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"!
If the Standard kilogram has gained weight (mass), then I have lost a corresponding amount. Hooray!
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.
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?
Exactly. To what do you calibrate the instrument you use to measure the standard?
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”.
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.
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 :)
The earth’s gravity is increasing as space dust and meteors are constantly added to the total mass of the earth.
Oops: “have defined” should be “have been defined”.
Not to mention the population increase each year :).
That’s not congressional, so it would be unconstitutional.
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.
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.