I can't help wondering what Dense Donny's 1000 gram kilogram gram is.
According to definions of gram and kilogram it must be 1 kilogram squared or
1,000,000 gram squared, I wonder what that could be used for. His 1000 gram
kilometer of water makes about as much sense as a fish riding a bicycle-
John Christiansen
"Gene Nygaard" <gnygaard@nccray.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:6oi8gvk9mameuj3d245m099q24d0kp6940@4ax.com...
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:01:16 GMT, "Donald G. Shead" <u10889@snet.net>
wrote:
The kilogram of the archives is not _exactly_ a _mathematical unit_: In
order to be a mathematical unit it would have to have the ratio of its
weight [w = 9.81 N], divided by the deceleration [g = 2s/tē] of that
weight
be numerically equal to _One_ [1]: That is the numerator of the ratio
[w/g =
9.81 N/(9.81 m/secē)] must equal one.
As i understand it, the kilogram of the archives differers from the 1000
gram kilometer of water by about 28 parts in 10^6.
The kilogram of the archives was made the unit of mass by the mutual
consent
of the member countries of the CGPM, and/or the "Meter Convention"; when
Wrong. That isn't the "kilogram of the archives."
they were unable to make an exact metalic replica of the 1000 gram
kilogram
of water.
When the CGPM was constructing those kilograms, about 40 of them from
which one was chosen as the "International Prototype Kilogram," water
never entered the picture. It wasn't their target. They were aiming
at the real "Kilogram of the Archives" which was the platinum standard
maintained by the French government from 1799 until replaced in 1889
by the new standards of the CGPM.
That's close enough for government work, and structural design, as well
as
for most practical purposes.
But they have yet to really come to grips with and resolve the century
old
problem of erroneously using grams-force, and kilograms-force; where they
should be using dynes-force, and newtons-force.
Anyone who doesn't accept the authority of the CGPM and all the
national and international standards organizations when they tell them
it is no longer proper to use dynes has no cause to complain about
someone else not accepting their authority to tell them to no longer
use kilograms force, which are another obsolete unit once endorsed by
the CGPM..
They just will not admit that's it has been a mistake to use grams and
kilograms for units of weight.
You know quite well, Dishonest Don, that when grams and kilograms are
used as units of weight, they are not units of force. They are units
of mass. It is the word "weight" which is ambiguous in this context,
not the word "kilogram."
They will not come right out and positively
say something like HEY you guys! From now on use newtons to designate
force,
and use kilograms to designate mass.
They've done that. Force and mass are indeed what you need to
distinguish. It's just that there is no SI unit designated as a "unit
of weight." Or, as NIST tells us, it depends on which meaning of the
word weight you are using
http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec08.html
Thus the SI unit of the quantity weight used in this
sense is the kilogram (kg)
Thus the SI unit of the quantity weight defined in
this way is the newton (N).
_Instead_ the pound-force [lbf] has been "legally defined" as a
pound-mass
[lbm]; where it [the pound] _should_ be defined as 0.4525 times the
weight-force exerted by a mass of one kilogram; where the acceleration of
free fall is 9.81 m/secē; such as at Sevres' France.
WHat is this, the fifteenth different Dense Donny definition of a
pound? Since the pound force doesn't have an official definition, you
could define it this way, equal to 4.439025 newtons. But nobody else
defines the pound force that way, and also you cannot define the
kilogram force this way, because it has an official definition which
differs from the one you are using.
Gene Nygaard
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/
Gentlemen of the jury, Chicolini here may look like an idiot,
and sound like an idiot, but don't let that fool you: He
really is an idiot.
Groucho Marx
.
