You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
55 points
*

Right? Didn’t they define the kilogram, make identical copies of the standard, sent them to different countries, then after years, reunited them and found they all diverged in mass?

And now they have made a perfect silicon sphere with the same mass as the standard kilogram, then counted all the atoms. So now we know the exact mass in silicon atoms of a kilo.

Let’s just define tagliatelle in light nanoseconds and be done with it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They gave up on that plan. Defining Plank’s constant happened first. It could still be done as a secondary confirmation, but it’s less of a race now to get away from K

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They counted the atoms?
Didn’t they just took the mol mass and calculated it? (Not sure if mol mass is the right term… School chemistry is a long time ago…)
And I don’t see how we even should be able to count them.
Would be really interested, if it happened that way, how they did it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
2 points

Thanks for the additional information!

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
3 points
2 points

Thank you very much!

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Since 2019, the kg is just defined in terms of the Plank constant and some math with the resonant frequency of cesium as well as the speed of light. There was too much variability in anything physical so they decided to just fix some constants at whatever value they were close to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_revision_of_the_SI

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It’s part of the attempt to more accurately define Avogadro’s number and the kilo.

https://www.nist.gov/si-redefinition/kilogram-silicon-spheres-and-international-avogadro-project

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

The redefinition of the mole in 2019, as being the amount of substance containing exactly 6.02214076×10^23 particles

Since the 2019 SI redefinition, avogadro’s number is a constant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro_constant

Edit: looks like we were both right! I was reading through your link and it seems the work reported by the NIST led to the exact definitions for Avogadro’s number and the Planck constant.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Mildly Interesting

!mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

Create post

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it’s too interesting, it doesn’t belong. If it’s not interesting, it doesn’t belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh… what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don’t spam.

Community stats

  • 3.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 288

    Posts

  • 3K

    Comments