Determining weight
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity
Next: Phi in nature
From: MorituriMax on 29 Jul 2005 01:21 "Don1" <dcshead(a)charter.net> wrote in message news:1122598562.715414.256090(a)g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Heck no. bui its quicker, easier and accurate enough for most everyday > measures in an environmentally controled (air conditioned) laboratory > or supermarket. And it's all he can afford on his social security.
From: LeoK on 29 Jul 2005 08:08 > While you are at it, what _is_ the volume and weight of a slug of water > at 39.2 degrees F, and > atmospheric (sea level) pressure? > > Don Don, I know the answer. You walk to the mountains. Picking up a most selected stone. Walk back to the scientific community. Making a manifesto of this stones weight is 1 kg. And its volume is 1 liter. Putting the manifesto on the board. Collecting the royalty of this standard. Saving the money collected in a bank. Living the rest of your life in happiness. End of story. LeoK
From: Don1 on 29 Jul 2005 09:18 LeoK wrote: > > While you are at it, what _is_ the volume and weight of a slug of water > > at 39.2 degrees F, and > > atmospheric (sea level) pressure? > > > > Don > > > Don, I know the answer. > > You walk to the mountains. > Picking up a most selected stone. > Walk back to the scientific community. > > Making a manifesto of this stones weight is 1 kg. How can a stone weigh 1 kg you lunkhead? A kg isn't a weight. > And its volume is 1 liter. If you melt it. Snip< It's plain to see that you are one of the "new breed"; certainly not a decent physicist. Don
From: briggs on 29 Jul 2005 09:19 In article <We2dnX_d3PQJ8HTfRVn-vQ(a)whidbeytel.com>, "odin" <ragnarok(a)yahoo.com> writes: >> You'd better learn some modern techniques Sam: Spring scales and >> steelyard type scales are the way weight is determined these days; from >> the three fundamental variables: Force (f), displacement (s), and time > > Spring scales? You must be joking. Even for every day objects, a balance > beam scale is better than a spring scale. It is too hard to calibrate for > the spring's dependence on temperature, variations in gravitational field, > buoyancy effects, and so on. And then there are the not-so-every-day > objects. Do you really think that the spring scale is the "modern technique" > for determining the mass of a subatomic particle or the mass of planet? I remember when the truck scale down at the grain elevator was a balance scale. These days, those scales use electronic load cells, the modern equivalent to a spring scale. Quite accurate and, being electronic, fairly convenient to calibrate. Of course, a load cell isn't much help weighing a subatomic particle or a planet -- unless you're concerned about the weight of the Earth in the gravitational field of a truckload of corn. John Briggs
From: Sam Wormley on 29 Jul 2005 10:16
Don1 wrote: > LeoK wrote: > >>>While you are at it, what _is_ the volume and weight of a slug of water >>>at 39.2 degrees F, and >>>atmospheric (sea level) pressure? >>> >>>Don >> >> >>Don, I know the answer. >> >>You walk to the mountains. >>Picking up a most selected stone. >>Walk back to the scientific community. >> >>Making a manifesto of this stones weight is 1 kg. > > > How can a stone weigh 1 kg you lunkhead? A kg isn't a weight. > > >>And its volume is 1 liter. > > > If you melt it. > > Snip< > > It's plain to see that you are one of the "new breed"; certainly not a > decent physicist. > > Don > Doesn't have to be liquid to have volume, Shead. |