Subscribe to our free daily newsletters
  Space Travel News  




Subscribe to our free daily newsletters



A Better Definition For The Kilogram. Scientists Propose A Precise Number Of Carbon Atoms

The International Prototype Kilogram or "Le Gran K" - has been losing mass, about 50 micrograms at last check.
by Staff Writers
Atlanta GA (SPX) Sep 24, 2007
How much is a kilogram? It turns out that nobody can say for sure, at least not in a way that won't change ever so slightly over time. The official kilogram - a cylinder cast 118 years ago from platinum and iridium and known as the International Prototype Kilogram or "Le Gran K" - has been losing mass, about 50 micrograms at last check. The change is occurring despite careful storage at a facility near Paris.

That's not so good for a standard the world depends on to define mass.

Now, two U.S. professors - a physicist and mathematician - say it's time to define the kilogram in a new and more elegant way that will be the same today, tomorrow and 118 years from now. They've launched a campaign aimed at redefining the kilogram as the mass of a very large - but precisely-specified - number of carbon-12 atoms.

"Our standard would eliminate the need for a physical artifact to define what a kilogram is," said Ronald F. Fox, a Regents' Professor Emeritus in the School of Physics at the Georgia Institute of Technology. "We want something that is logically very simple to understand."

Their proposal is that the gram - 1/1000th of a kilogram - would henceforth be defined as the mass of exactly 18 x 14074481 (cubed) carbon-12 atoms.

The proposal, made by Fox and Theodore P. Hill - a Professor Emeritus in the Georgia Tech School of Mathematics - first assigns a specific value to Avogadro's constant. Proposed in the 1800s by Italian scientist Amedeo Avogadro, the constant represents the number of atoms or molecules in one mole of a pure material - for instance, the number of carbon-12 atoms in 12 grams of the element. However, Avogadro's constant isn't a specific number; it's a range of values that can be determined experimentally, but not with enough precision to be a single number.

Spurred by Hill's half-serious question about whether Avogadro's constant was an even or odd number, in the fall of 2006 Fox and Hill submitted a paper to Physics Archives in which they proposed assigning a specific number to the constant - one of about 10 possible values within the experimental range. The authors pointed out that a precise Avogadro's constant could also precisely redefine the measure of mass, the kilogram.

Their proposal drew attention from the editors of American Scientist, who asked for a longer article published in March 2007. The proposal has so far drawn five letters, including one from Paul J. Karol, chair of the Committee on Nomenclature, Terminology and Symbols of the American Chemical Society. Karol added his endorsement to the proposal and suggested making the number divisible by 12 - which Fox and Hill did in an addendum by changing their number's final digit from 8 to 6. So the new proposal for Avogadro's constant became 84446886 (cubed), still within the range of accepted values.

Fast-forward to September 2007, when Fox read an Associated Press article on the CNN.com Web site about the mass disappearing from the International Prototype Kilogram. While the AP said the missing mass amounted to no more than "the weight of a fingerprint," Fox argues that the amount could be significant in a world that is measuring time in ultra-sub-nanoseconds and length in ultra-sub-nanometers.

So Fox and Hill fired off another article to Physics Archive, this one proposing to redefine the gram as 1/12th the mass of a mole of carbon 12 - a mole long being defined as Avogrado's number of atoms. They now hope to generate more interest in their idea for what may turn out to be a competition of standards proposals leading up to a 2011 meeting of the International Committee for Weights and Measures.

At least two other proposals for redefining the kilogram are under discussion. They include replacing the platinum-iridium cylinder with a sphere of pure silicon atoms, and using a device known as the "watt balance" to define the kilogram using electromagnetic energy. Both would offer an improvement over the existing standard - but not be as simple as what Fox and Hill have proposed, nor be exact, they say.

"Using a perfect numerical cube to define these constants yields the same level of significance - eight or nine digits - as in those integers that define the second and the speed of light," Hill said. "A purely mathematical definition of the kilogram is experimentally neutral - researchers may then use any laboratory method they want to approximate exact masses."

The kilogram is the last major standard defined by a physical artifact rather than a fundamental physical property. In 1983, for instance, the distance represented by a meter was redefined by how far light travels in 1/299,792,458 seconds - replacing a metal stick with two marks on it.

"We suspect that there will be some public debate about this issue," Fox said. "We want scientists and science teachers and others to think about this problem because we think they can have an impact. Public discussion may play an important role in determining how one of the world's basic physical constants is defined."

How important is this issue to the world's future technological development"

"When you make physical and chemical measurements, it's important to have as high a precision as possible, and these standards really define the limits of precision," Fox said. "The lack of an accurate standard leaves some inconsistency in how you state results. Having a unique standard could eliminate that."

While the new definition would do away with the need for a physical representation of mass, Fox says people who want a physical artifact could still have one - though carbon can't actually form a perfect cube with the right number of atoms. And building one might take some time.

"You could imagine having a lump of matter that actually had exactly the right number of atoms in it," Fox noted. "If you could build it by some kind of self-assembly process - as opposed to building it atom-by-atom, which would take a few billion years - you could have new kilogram artifact made of carbon. But there's really no need for that. Even if you built a perfect kilogram, it would immediately be inaccurate as soon as a single atom was sloughed off or absorbed."

Related Links
Georgia Institute of Technology Research News
Understanding Time and Space



Memory Foam Mattress Review
Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily
XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News


Research Overturns Accepted Notion Of Neutron's Electrical Properties
Seattle WA (SPX) Sep 19, 2007
For two generations of physicists, it has been a standard belief that the neutron, an electrically neutral elementary particle and a primary component of an atom, actually carries a positive charge at its center and an offsetting negative charge at its outer edge. The notion was first put forth in 1947 by Enrico Fermi, a Nobel laureate noted for his role in developing the first nuclear reactor.







  • ATK wins USAF space propulsion contract
  • The Prius Of Space
  • Northrop Grumman KEI Team Completes Fourth Rocket Motor Test
  • Chinese Astronauts Test Traditional Chinese Medicines In Space

  • Pratt And Whitney Rocketdyne's RS-27A Powers New-Gen Imaging Satellite To Orbit
  • United Launch Alliance Launches 75th Consecutive Delta II On USAF 60th Anniversary
  • Russian Space Launch Vehicle Firing Tests Set For 2008
  • Arianespace To Launch Japanese Satellite JCSAT-12

  • Strut repairs could delay shuttle launch: NASA
  • Technicians To Begin Discovery Strut Repairs
  • STS-120 To Deliver Harmony Node To ISS
  • NASA finds cracks on shuttle tanks

  • Space Station Expedition 16 Crew Approved
  • Progress M-60 To Serve Science Before Burning Up In Atmosphere
  • Boeing Hardware Installed During Space Shuttle Endeavour Mission
  • Outside View: Obsolete space industry

  • Russia aims for new far east space launch pad by 2020
  • Global space summit looks to the future, 50 years after Sputnik-1
  • Malaysian 'Gagarin' hopes to observe Ramadan fast in space
  • NASA Helps Wipe Away Worries About Germs

  • China To Build New Space Launch Center In Southernmost Province
  • China Launches Third Sino-Brazilian Earth Resources Satellite
  • Mission To Moon Not A Race With Others
  • At Least 3 Chinese Satellites Malfunctioning Since 2006

  • Microsoft teams up in Japan to set robotics standards
  • Drive-By-Wire And Human Behavior Systems Key To Virginia Tech Urban Challenge Vehicle
  • Successful Jules Verne Rendezvous Simulation At ATV Control Centre
  • Robotic Einstein Wows Spanish Technology Fair

  • NASA Orbiter Finds Possible Cave Skylights On Mars
  • Shaking Off The Dust And Getting Back To Work
  • Life on Mars Pregnancy Test Launched
  • Changes to Mars Science Lab Project Respond to Cost Increases And Keep Program On Track

  • The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright Space.TV Corporation. AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space.TV Corp on any Web page published or hosted by Space.TV Corp. Privacy Statement