-- Since weight is mass multiplied by the acceleration of gravity and most people use scales instead of beam balances and calibrated reference masses to do the measurement, they measure weight, not mass. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighing_scale
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:27:32 -0500, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wibbled:
Presumably that depends on whether your buying (rough)sawn or planed/ regularised?
As I said, the planed over here is about 1/8" - 1/4" smaller as it starts life from the sawmill as 4x2" more or less exactly.
Outside timber which is tanalised by default pretty much is still true to the inch here. Pre about-1970s untreated sawn timber was also true to the inch - my house is full of it.
-- Tim Watts Managers, politicians and environmentalists: Nature's carbon buffer.
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:32:09 -0500, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wibbled:
You should try my village, which dates back to 1066 - in fact the Battle of Hastings was fought and shamefully lost (especially when you visit the field and see the massive tactical advantage Harold had), 3 miles down the road in a town called "Battle" (hmm) and not actually in Hastings which is rather further down the road.
I digress...
Ceilings you can brush your head on and 5' front doors or less on some of the old timber framed houses.
Mine is regular modern, 2.4m ceilings which is, erm, a shade under 8' - fairly typical.
I think they like 8' here - means really modern (ie crap) houses can be drywalled with one sheet of plasterboard/sheetrock on the vertical.
-- Tim Watts Managers, politicians and environmentalists: Nature's carbon buffer.
-- Then, by your "logic", "millimeter" is an Imperial term since 1mm = 0.03937" In actuality, what makes the carat a metric term is that the weight of gemstones is measured using the metric system and described in metric units.
of
That's true, but if the weighing scale is correctly calibrated, the weight measurement is equivalent to that of a mass balance.
Most people in the world use SI units, and they weigh things in kilograms. A kg is a unit of mass.
Whether they use springs or balance beams or load cells, the reported result is mass. kg, not newtons.
John
And the roots of the original gem classification system was also European and metric.
I wish they could standardize more things these days. Even things that have standards have vast differences in production and "feature" sets.
Like hard drive mounting systems.
Maybe the new 1.5" SAS drives will all have a like stainless slide mount that the whole industry embraces.
All these cameras and steel cased phones and DVD drive mechs and all with the tiny pressed sheet steel parts inside. So it would not be a cost issue. If the whole industry did it, it would actually become cheaper and cheapest to make the mounts. Instead, we currently have a mish-mash of designs, and they are all cheap Chinese case maker proprietary, and mostly crap design wise.
Odd, the direction the world has gone in the last twenty years.
Only if it got calibrated where it got used.
Wrong. The spring scale AND the load cell are calibrated against this planet's gravity, and are 100% altitude of use bound. The balance operates exactly the same regardless of altitude or even what planetoid it is on. The measure can only be called the object's "weight".
The spring scale (and load cell) weighs "weight" and that only at the same altitude at which it was calibrated.
The balance weigh mass, as compared against a known, calibrated mass, and the result is a measure of mass, and can be referred to as weight or mass of the object, and will perform that task whether it is on Earth or the Moon.
I'll let you do the math. I'd start with Newton's Principia.
Or a bunch of trained beavers?
-- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Does your bathroom scale report newtons? Most of the weighing devices in the world report kilograms.
John
You still fail to differentiate the physical method of measure from the 'scale of units' being reported, and you assume that due to the scale used, the report must be a measure of mass instead of weight. That is NOT the case. Just because the scale is graduated in kg does not mean that it weighs mass. EVER. The physical TYPE of scale is what determines what is actually being measured. Does the scale compare a pressure applied against a spring or strip (load cell)with respect to gravity, or does it compare to the force of a known mass in the same field of reference at the time of measure?
Even your calibrated spring or load cell based scale only measures weight, regardless of graduated, calibrated range of operation, due to said calibration being referenced to gravity's effect on said load cell or spring.
In other words, the calibration is only good at the bench it is calibrated on.
Granted, the error is only slight once moved, but it does illustrate that the reference is to gravity, not mass.
Even a kilogram calibrated bathroom spring OR load cell scale is STILL only measuring WEIGHT at that altitude, pressure and location on this globe at which it was calibrated. Move it anywhere and the calibration reference is off, so the scale is only calibrated for weight from a gravitational and atmospheric reference point.
Unless it is a balance, one is not measuring mass... ever, even on the most sensitive 'weight scale'.
A balance scale ALWAYS weighs mass, because it compares the TORQUE applied to a center tie point between two equidistant arms. The FORCE the MASSES apply to those arms, and the known calibrated masses used on the plate resting on one arm, allows us to determine the mass of whatever is placed onto the plate resting on the other arm based on the amount of FORCE that mass applies to it.
Bwuahahahahahah! Two birds with one post! TORQUE DOES rely on FORCE and spring and load cell scales do NOT measure mass.
The present standard for the SI unit of mass, the kilogram, is the International Prototype Kilogram or IPK. The IPK is a machined cylinder made from an alloy of 90% platinum and 10% iridium (by weight). The IPK is kept at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures) in Sèvres, France.
The kilogram is the only SI unit that is still defined based on a physical artifact rather than on a reproducible property.
Nobody's yet figured out a "reproducible property" for mass, as they have for the other SI units.
We'll just have to continue "weighing" the standard!
-- Virg Wall
True, and the calibration should be performed where the scale will be used.
Archimedes Lever in Oceanside, CA using yet another nym wrote: AL > Humans, being the contrary, savior murdering AL > f[]s we are, will surely go with the stubborn AL > path. Before we get settled on things and ever AL > become a truly civil society, he'll be back, and AL > none of it will matter any more anyway.
This is an example of how a sociopath learns to pretend that they have emotions or beliefs that other people do.
Sociopaths like you do not really believe in God. You know how to posture as if you do. Sociopaths commonly place themselves in the position of being God. We're all just bugs in your jar.
The carat long predated metric units.
John
AlwaysWrong!
John
-- Sorry, but no. The result of the measurement is caused by a force acting on a mass, the product of which is called a "newton" if the mass is 1kg and the force is the attraction due to gravity, 9.8m/s². The report of the result is printed on the scale in terms of mass, (kinda like the RMS scales on ac voltmeters, even if they're not measuring RMS) in order to keep from confusing the lay public, but it's newtons what's doing the work. By definition, mass describes _only_ inertial resistance, while weight describes the force exerted on a mass by gravity. Consequently, a 1kg mass would exhibit identical inertial resistance on either the Earth or the moon, but on the moon it would weigh about 1/6 of what it does here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram-force http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mass-weight-d_589.html
-- Yow!!! They'd probably get splinters in their knickers. ;)
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.