Slashdot Mirror


The Changing Definition Of 'Kilogram'

DrLudicrous writes "The NYTimes is reporting that the platinum-iridium standard mass for the kilogram is shedding at an appreciable rate -- at least compared to other reference masses. The Pt-Ir cylinder is kept in France, and measured annually, and the slight discrepancy is important because the kg is an SI base unit- thus other quantities such as the Volt are based on it. A new standard is being sought- the two frontrunners are counting the number of atoms in a perfectly spherical single crystal of silicon, and another technique uses a device known as the Watt balance."

26 of 964 comments (clear)

  1. Kilogram? by ihatewinXP · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey I live in America you insensitive clod! (but then again I alawys want to know how much they are lifting on Strongman Competition).

    --
    ---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
    1. Re:Kilogram? by __aafkqj3628 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then maybe america should move out of the dark ages sometime.

    2. Re:Kilogram? by el-spectre · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not a matter of dark ages, it's a matter of infrastructure... while not the largest country in the world (the US is probably third or fourth, I'm not sure), we have by far the most technological infrastructure. It is not feasible to change all that in a short period of time.

      A friend is in construction, and guestimates that it will take over 100 years to replace all failing/obsolete tech with the versions in metric equivalents. It just does not make any economic sense to replace a set of, say, water pipes with the metric standard if the current ones will last 20 years. It'll have to be a gradual thing.

      Just to be difficult, though, I'd mention that most construction is done in 'tenths of feet', even the surveying equipment is marked this way. Has nothing to do with the metric system, it just makes the math easier...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    3. Re:Kilogram? by Spooky+Possum · · Score: 5, Funny

      Consider the facts:

      Congress authorised the use of the metric system in 1866.

      The US signed the Treaty of the Meter in 1875.

      Congress passed the Metric Conversion Act in 1975.

      So clearly the US *is* on the metric system :).

    4. Re:Kilogram? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Moving to the metric system... inch by inch.

    5. Re:Kilogram? by SN74S181 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps we don't have the coercive state apparatus necessary to 'make' the metric system the primary system that we use.

      Me, I have been doing a lot of woodworking lately. It's convenient to use a unit (the Foot) that divides easily into subunits that are multiples of both 3 and 4, without having to get all mired in floating point arithmetic.

      But we have this metric flamefest every time the metric system comes up on Slashdot, and the same crap comes up every time.

      I'm just happy that pointy-head metric zealots don't seem to have much pull in the real world of regular people. Keep on ranting, dudes.

    6. Re:Kilogram? by radish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do know the metric system is many hundred of years old don't you? In fact it's older than your country. The point is the US has had 200 years and they haven't even started the process. There's nothing saying you can't run in parallel - the UK has been doing so for years. It's absurd to say you have to rip out all the imperial pipes and replace them - you just have to keep 2 sets of tools around until those old pipes get replaced naturally. It really isn't hard, it's just the US can't be bothered.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    7. Re:Kilogram? by sphealey · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Then maybe america should move out of the dark ages sometime.
      Funny how when the topic is software or food supplies, everyone jumps in with comments about the dangers of monoculture and the value of diversity in supply, but when the topic is the metric system there can be no deviation from the ONE TRUE FAITH.

      Personally, having gone through school at a time when the US was considering a change, and having spent some time in Europe, I have no problem with the metric system. It is more convenient from some tasks, particularly in the chem lab.

      But there is nothing inherently superior about a measurement system based on powers of 10. For many tasks, such as woodworking, metric measurements are far more difficult to work with than inches and 1/16th. In fact I would argue that the most "natural" base for a measurement system is 12 as it is evenly divisible by 2, 3, and 4; whereras base 10 is only divisible by 2 and 5. Thirds and fourths are very common divisions of stuff; fifths are not, so a base 12 system is more user-friendly.

      That's my 0.02 euro anyway.

      sPh

  2. My wife changes her definition... by craenor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everytime she steps on the scales...I would tell you what it was defined as last week, but kids may be reading this.

  3. Counting Si by brokenbeaker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The problem with the single crystal of silicon method, a few years ago, was that there were all these lattice vacany defects cropping up. The formation of such point vacancies is so entropically favoured that I don't think they can ever eliminate them...

    1. Re:Counting Si by porp · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think I can speak for everyone and say

      HUH?

      porp

    2. Re:Counting Si by dhovis · · Score: 5, Informative

      Vacancies are not necessarily a problem. As you say, vacancies are entropically favored, but there is also a formation energy associated with a vacancy. So thermodynamics tells us there will be a balance between the energy required to create a vacancy with the entropy gained by creating one.

      Thus, there is an equilibrium number of vacancies in any crystal. As long as you know what the equilibrium value is for a given temperature and you maintain that temperature, then you will also know how many vacant sites you will have on the crystal lattice. I don't have any of my texts handy, but I'm sure someone can chime in with the numbers for silicon.

      To sum up. All crystals will have vacancies because vacancies are thermodynamically favored. However, the number of vacancies will tend towards an equilibrium value which allows them to be accounted for.

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

    3. Re:Counting Si by neodymium · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you really would try to build such a crystal, vacanies could very well be the problem. As you said, there is an equilibrium value of defects in any crystal. This equilibrium value is temperature dependant with a exp(-Eform/kT) law, where Eform is the formation enthalpy. High temperature means high rate of defects.

      Si single crystals are usually prepared at very high temperatures out of molten Silicon (1414C, Czochralsky method). Essentially, this will lead to a freezing of the defect structure at temperatures close to the melting point, because the lattice reorientation kinetics (point diffusion) also are thermally activated.

      You would have to temper the crystal for _very_ long times at temperatures of i.e. 300C to get a thermal equilibrium of defects at this temperature. These times could be >>years !

  4. reproducibility by nthomas · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Although it was mentioned in the article, I think it should be emphasized that the SI definition of the kilogram, unlike their definitions of the meter and second, cannot be reproduced -- or rather, reproduced exactly. This is quite important, as it is neccessary for the standards governing body in each country to have a very precise reference weight of their own.

    Since there is only one reference object for the kilogram, everything else is just a copy -- and even if it is a first generation copy, errors are bound to creep in.

    The redefinition of the kg is long overdue, mad props to the scientists working on this.

  5. Can someone help me convert here?? by Helpadingoatemybaby · · Score: 5, Funny
    give me imperial measurements any day

    Darn right! After all, it's easy enough to convert fortnights to stone with a Mayan calendar.

    We're going to in the future eventually. It's inevitable.

    I know it's 60 firesticks per 100 Watts, and 3000 Volts per staticy tomcat, but it might just be easier if we all just jumped in and switched to metric 144%.

    I mean picture doing 100 on the highway! Wouldn't that be great? And dozens of future Mars landers would actually land on Mars, instead of digging ideal tree planting holes and landscaping future martian neighbourhoods. ("Zyphod! Incoming! It's the Americans!")

    No more two sets of wrenches and lost sockets! Now you can have one set of sockets with half the sockets missing, instead of two sets of sockets with half the sockets missing. And no more asking for an 5mm and trying to make a 1 3/4" fit, rounding off the edges and carving a perfect turkey slice off your hand and gushing gallons of blood. It would be litres, which is less.

    And you get to tell women that you, sir, are endowed with twenty-two centimeters of man!

    Of course, the loss of the 25 cent piece will be a negative, since we'll have to pay for everything in dimes. But it's worth it dammit.

    Seriously, we all know this is going to happen. When are we on board? Are we that stubborn?

    --

    The baby's fine -- please stop sending business cards.

  6. Re:I Agree - We should go metric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not the arbitrariness, but the fact that metric is a decimal system.

    The only countries left that don't use metric are the US and Bhutan. Bhutan is a fundamentalist islamic country that doesn't even have any phones yet. I guess we can see what the US' technical level is.

  7. In other news by djupedal · · Score: 5, Funny

    The only known quantity of Unobtainium (UB238) has gone missing.

    The 1 kilo square block was being held in Brussels awaiting return to Brazil, where it was originally unearthed.

    It was determined that the physical stability of the material was being affected by being moved from it's original location, that of being south of the equator. Investigators are anxious to reclaim the material in hopes of stabalizing it's rumored flux in mass. The UB238 was being packaged for transit, when it suddenly dissapeared from the shipping room counter. The rumor that it had created, and subsequently fallen into, a 'portable black hole' was discounted by investigators on the scene.

    Once the Unobtainium is recovered, and returned to Brazil, it can be weighed and certified as a replacement for the Pt-Ir cylinder that is kept in France, and measured annually, representing the kilo standard for the world.

    MPEG at 11.

  8. Volt is no longer defined by Kilogram by Dhrakar · · Score: 5, Informative

    The posted article, while interesting, is wrong about the volt being based on the Kilogram. Since about 1990, the volt is defined to be the voltage applied to a Josephson junction that produces a frequency of 483,597.9 GHz. This new standard was implemented in order to get away from relying on 'artifact' standards (such as the Kg cylinder). One quick source page on Josephson junctions (which completely revolutionized the field of Metrology back when I was a calibration tech in the AF) is:
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solids/ squid.html
    If I recall correctly, the eventual goal of the international standards organization was to find ways to define everything in terms of frequency/time since we can measure time so accurately/precisely.

    1. Re:Volt is no longer defined by Kilogram by vrt3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the volt was based on the kilogram (and therefore a relationship exists between the two), and now volt is based on frequency, isn't it possible and wouldn't it be a good idea to base the kilogram on the volt? Then we don't need those perfect references anymore.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  9. huzzah! by madmarcel · · Score: 5, Funny

    So I now weigh 75kg...give or take a bit :o

    Wait till I tell my fiance that her weight
    fluctuates on a weekly basis!

  10. Re:yeah it's a mess by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny
    I think that these base-2 units are confusing because their names look too much like the base-10 units and because their magnitudes are too close.

    A better way would be to invent an all new imperial-style system for measuring computer storage. That way, there would be no chance for confusion with any base-10 system. For example:

    korb = 3 bytes
    fleb = 12 korbs
    splin = 20 fleeb
    fnit = 6 splins
    Fnit = 6000 splins
    frush = 48 fnits
    watz = 18 frushes (19.5 frushes in the U.K.)
    spoff = 480 watzen
    nurm = 320 spoffs
    long nurm = 80 nurm
    munnel = 24 long nurm

    This system easily covers storage capacities up to today's confusingly named "petabyte". Plus, there's no ambiguity about what you're measuring. Any of these units implies bytes of storage, which is a much cleaner solution.

    The computer I'm using now has 71+29/32 watzes of system memory and 44+10/16 spoffs of disk space. There's no confusion about fuzzy definitions of "mega" with that measurement.

  11. Re:I Agree - We should go metric by The+Cydonian · · Score: 5, Informative

    Fundamentalist Islamic country without any telephones?

    Can I have some of whatever your smoking please?

  12. I apply for the vacant job! by q.kontinuum · · Score: 5, Funny

    The kilo shall be defined to be 1/80 of my weight. In return for the honor I promis to make the worlds people slim down.

    --
    Trolling is a art!
  13. Pipe-sizes are not that simple... by Ashtead · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Threaded pipe dimensions in inches were based on the internal diameter at some point, just to make things even more interesting. Thus, a so-called 1/2" pipe actually has an external diameter of approximately 20 mm, which translates to somewhat more than 3/4". All the common Pipe Thread sizes are this way. There has been some attempt at metricising these, at least within Scandinavia, instead of referring to terms like 1/2" or 3/4" pipe threads, terms like R15 and R20 have been seen instead. That seems to be neither here nor there.

    Just to confuse the matter more, in the 1970s, it was common to use metric sizes of threaded copper pipe, which had external diameters in sizes approximating common fractions of inches: 13mm = 1/2", 16mm = 5/8" and 19mm = 3/4" just to mention some of them. These appearently were all threaded with 1mm pitch threads.

    Later, these were replaced by true metric pipe sizes with compression fittings or capillary solder fittings. Now the sizes changed again, common ones are 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 22, and 28 mm. And of course, one needed compression fittings made for 16mm and 19mm also, so as to fit the older pipes...

    That's Europe. What I have seen in the US are the commonly found so-called 1/2" copper pipes with solder fittings, this is about 16mm (5/8") in diameter, so I guess they are still using internal diameter measurements. Similarly, the so-called 3/4" pipes appear to have about 21mm outside diameter.

    I guess the easiest way to turn these into metric sizes would be to redefine them as 16mm and 21mm and leave it at that. At least the traditional inch-units pipe thread sizes are roughly the same everywhere!

    --
    SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
    1. Re:Pipe-sizes are not that simple... by Rolo+Tomasi · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sir, you are indeed a well-traveled man! You obviously have laid pipe across the globe.

      --
      Did you know you can fertilize your lawn with used motor oil?
  14. So is the US by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 5, Informative
    IIRC the pound (or most versions of it anyway) is defined in terms of the kilogram these days, rather than the average weight of a grain of barley. Otherwise they would have problems if the US genetically modified barley to include jellyfish genes or whatever the seed companies reckon you should be forced to eat (and unless you grow your own food, you are eating it).

    And the metre is defined properly these days (as is the second) in terms of wavelengths of radiation.