If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Yo momma's so fat, even her kilograms have gained weight   (foxnews.com) divider line 77
    More: Interesting, fundamental constants, weight measurement, obesity, imaging science, fat, international standards, Peter Cumpson, radioactive material  
•       •       •

9304 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jan 2013 at 12:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-01-07 10:02:33 AM
The kilogram has gained weight

Whoa. This is heavy.
 
2013-01-07 10:09:09 AM
I thought kilograms measured mass, rather than weight?
 
2013-01-07 10:09:12 AM
"The cylinder, which weighs approximately 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), is the definition of the kilogram."
 
2013-01-07 10:29:40 AM

Gonz: I thought kilograms measured mass, rather than weight?


If one gains mass while the gravitational forces of Earth remain consistent, then one's weight (the measure of Earth's gravitational forces on said mass) will also increase.
 
2013-01-07 10:42:37 AM
www.wcurtisdraper.com

Does not approve.
 
2013-01-07 11:09:37 AM
The international standard, a cylinder-shaped hunk of metal that defines the fundamental unit of mass, has gained tens of micrograms in weight from surface contamination, according to a new study.

If it's the international standard, then any increased or decreased mass becomes the new standard, by definition.  If we perceive the standard as being wrong and it needs to be cleaned so that it's reduced to our expected amount of mass, it sounds like our expectation is more the true standard than the cylinder.
 
2013-01-07 12:23:58 PM

Lumpmoose: The international standard, a cylinder-shaped hunk of metal that defines the fundamental unit of mass, has gained tens of micrograms in weight from surface contamination, according to a new study.

If it's the international standard, then any increased or decreased mass becomes the new standard, by definition.  If we perceive the standard as being wrong and it needs to be cleaned so that it's reduced to our expected amount of mass, it sounds like our expectation is more the true standard than the cylinder.


No. If it's the international standard, it should remain constant. Having contamination means that it needs to be cleaned so that it can get back to being what it's supposed to be. No different than a white shirt getting dirty. Have your wife clean that so that it's white again.
 
2013-01-07 12:24:33 PM
They should just throw that cylinder out and keep whatever they used to weigh it that showed them that it's too heavy.
 
2013-01-07 12:24:59 PM

Yes please: "The cylinder, which weighs approximately 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), is the definition of the kilogram."


I saw this myself. Ever notice that, in college, the journalism/comm school tends to have the least intelligent people?
 
2013-01-07 12:25:51 PM

ronaprhys: Lumpmoose: The international standard, a cylinder-shaped hunk of metal that defines the fundamental unit of mass, has gained tens of micrograms in weight from surface contamination, according to a new study.

If it's the international standard, then any increased or decreased mass becomes the new standard, by definition.  If we perceive the standard as being wrong and it needs to be cleaned so that it's reduced to our expected amount of mass, it sounds like our expectation is more the true standard than the cylinder.

No. If it's the international standard, it should remain constant. Having contamination means that it needs to be cleaned so that it can get back to being what it's supposed to be. No different than a white shirt getting dirty. Have your wife clean that so that it's white again.


Then yo momma come bustin in tha door, talkin bout oh yeah!
 
2013-01-07 12:27:37 PM
I have way more surface area, so from now on I'm claiming any weight gain on environmental contamination due to age.
 
2013-01-07 12:27:50 PM
FoxNews. So I'm sure the science is sound.
 
2013-01-07 12:28:12 PM
Can't they keep it somewhere where it won't get surface contamination? Clean room or something?
 
2013-01-07 12:28:43 PM
does this mean I can get my sentence reduced?
 
2013-01-07 12:29:37 PM
I thought they changed the kilogram standard to the most perfect sphere created by man to date, made out of a perfect silicon crystal lattice? Was this never officially adopted? Wouldn't solve the problem of people leaving traces of their grubby mitts on it, just curious and too lazy to look it up...
 
2013-01-07 12:30:16 PM
This is why metric sucks.

It's all literal and sciencey and stuff.
 
2013-01-07 12:30:55 PM

Pfighting Polish: Yes please: "The cylinder, which weighs approximately 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), is the definition of the kilogram."

I saw this myself. Ever notice that, in college, the journalism/comm school tends to have the least intelligent people?


While journalists are typically not the most scientifically literate, the sentence is not incorrect. She didn't write that a kilogram is defined as 2.2 lbs., she noted that a kilogram weighs 2.2. lbs. Though to be most rigorous, she could've written that it weighs 2.2 lbs on Earth.
 
2013-01-07 12:31:26 PM
"I get some pledge"

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-07 12:33:16 PM
I love how the kilogram pictured is framed by an inch-based ruler...
 
2013-01-07 12:34:41 PM
"Long-term, however, most scientists want to get away from defining the kilogram based on a hunk of metal."

It appears this artcile was written with the assumption that a kilo is an arbitrary measure. But isn't a kilogram determined by the weight of a liter of water?
 
2013-01-07 12:35:07 PM
What are they weighing it with? If it's measured by another cylinder, wouldn't that one have gained weight as well? Which would leave the experiment impossible to resolve...
 
2013-01-07 12:35:43 PM

pkellmey: I have way more surface area, so from now on I'm claiming any weight gain on environmental contamination due to age.


Ring Dings don't count as "environmental contamination".
 
2013-01-07 12:36:39 PM
www.qwantz.com
There is also a Dinosaur Comic for every occasion.
 
2013-01-07 12:36:50 PM

JustMatt: I thought they changed the kilogram standard to the most perfect sphere created by man to date, made out of a perfect silicon crystal lattice? Was this never officially adopted? Wouldn't solve the problem of people leaving traces of their grubby mitts on it, just curious and too lazy to look it up...


Have you seen how quickly lattice wilts?
 
2013-01-07 12:37:51 PM

JustMatt: I thought they changed the kilogram standard to the most perfect sphere created by man to date, made out of a perfect silicon crystal lattice? Was this never officially adopted? Wouldn't solve the problem of people leaving traces of their grubby mitts on it, just curious and too lazy to look it up...


It's called the Avogadro project. It's under consideration, but hasn't been taken to committee since they haven't determined if it will be more stable in the long term than the current standard. There are other proposals as well to try and move away from a physical artifact as the standard. The generally favored ones are to define the kilogram in terms of the Planck constant, but that's on hold until 2014, according to wikipedia.
 
2013-01-07 12:38:21 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: While journalists are typically not the most scientifically literate, the sentence is not incorrect. She didn't write that a kilogram is defined as 2.2 lbs., she noted that a kilogram weighs 2.2. lbs. Though to be most rigorous, she could've written that it weighs 2.2 lbs on Earth.


The issue I take is that, in translating the weight of a kilogram to pounds, she also felt the need to translate it back to metric in parenthesis. Take out the pounds part and, oh, a kilogram is the equivalent of a kilogram? Really.

By this standard, I bet the article only goes out of the house on mornings when she doesn't take a shower, because she gets stuck in there for hours when she reads "Lather, rinse, repeat."
 
2013-01-07 12:38:39 PM
This is what happens when you adopt the Arabic's metric system. Like everything else they, it's inherently flawed.

/gets forty rods to the hogshead in my Prius.
 
2013-01-07 12:38:56 PM
Is this really a bad attempt by Fox News to try and discredit the metric system?
 
2013-01-07 12:39:15 PM

Pfighting Polish: TofuTheAlmighty: By this standard, I bet the article only goes out of the house on mornings when she doesn't take a shower, because she gets stuck in there for hours when she reads "Lather, rinse, repeat."


Edit: "writer of the article"

/Minored in Comm myself
//Majored in Computer Science
 
2013-01-07 12:40:12 PM

You Must Construct Additional Pylons.: This is why metric sucks.

It's all literal and sciencey and stuff.


I don't think the lead singer is literally breathing under water. It's a metaphor; and scientifically impossible.

/get this song out of my head!
 
2013-01-07 12:40:22 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: Pfighting Polish: Yes please: "The cylinder, which weighs approximately 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), is the definition of the kilogram."

I saw this myself. Ever notice that, in college, the journalism/comm school tends to have the least intelligent people?

While journalists are typically not the most scientifically literate, the sentence is not incorrect. She didn't write that a kilogram is defined as 2.2 lbs., she noted that a kilogram weighs 2.2. lbs. Though to be most rigorous, she could've written that it weighs 2.2 lbs on Earth.


Perhaps he was referring to the line after 2.2 pounds: "(1 kilogram) is the definition of the kilogram."
 
2013-01-07 12:41:28 PM
Does this kilogram make my ass look fat?
 
2013-01-07 12:41:37 PM
Faux News is so fake, that its cue-card holders are cardboard cut-outs.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-01-07 12:42:04 PM
Handsome B. Wonderful: Is this really a bad attempt by Fox News to try and discredit the metric system?

No, it's an attempt by LiveScience to discredit the metric system.
 
2013-01-07 12:42:12 PM

palan: JustMatt: I thought they changed the kilogram standard to the most perfect sphere created by man to date, made out of a perfect silicon crystal lattice? Was this never officially adopted? Wouldn't solve the problem of people leaving traces of their grubby mitts on it, just curious and too lazy to look it up...

It's called the Avogadro project. It's under consideration, but hasn't been taken to committee since they haven't determined if it will be more stable in the long term than the current standard. There are other proposals as well to try and move away from a physical artifact as the standard. The generally favored ones are to define the kilogram in terms of the Planck constant, but that's on hold until 2014, according to wikipedia.


That's what I was thinking of. Thanks for the additional info!
 
2013-01-07 12:43:12 PM

JohnCarter: "I get some pledge"

[25.media.tumblr.com image 200x281]


I got something she can wax.

fc06.deviantart.net
/I wish
 
2013-01-07 12:43:50 PM

Zoidfarb: [www.qwantz.com image 735x500]
There is also a Dinosaur Comic for every occasion.


I hope they are funnier than that one. I want those 5 minutes back.
 
2013-01-07 12:44:02 PM

Pfighting Polish: Pfighting Polish: TofuTheAlmighty: By this standard, I bet the article only goes out of the house on mornings when she doesn't take a shower, because she gets stuck in there for hours when she reads "Lather, rinse, repeat."

Edit: "writer of the article"

/Minored in Comm myself
//Majored in Computer Science


In the past, it might have been called movable type.
 
2013-01-07 12:44:36 PM
 
2013-01-07 12:44:51 PM
24.media.tumblr.com

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-07 12:46:07 PM

Atomgirl: "Long-term, however, most scientists want to get away from defining the kilogram based on a hunk of metal."

It appears this artcile was written with the assumption that a kilo is an arbitrary measure. But isn't a kilogram determined by the weight of a liter of water?


The gram (not kilogram) was determined by a cube of water in the 1800's. it changed because the weight can vary by temperature, pressure and composition. Since the weight is determined by the isotopes composing the water was deemed problematic and tried to find a stable artifact to base the mass on, leading to the weight they used.
 
2013-01-07 12:46:44 PM
To clean them, a skilled technician will rub the cylinders with chamois dipped in alcohol.

Hell, give my cleaning lady $60 and she'll throw the toilets in for free.
 
2013-01-07 12:47:35 PM

abhorrent1: Can't they keep it somewhere where it won't get surface contamination? Clean room or something?


Came here to ask the same. I was thinking vacuum container inside a sealed red-light clean room, weighed and observed via the console in an adjacent clean room, with the whole thing inside an underground vault.

Unless the whole concept of a platinum-iridium reference weight just isn't that important, in which case keeping it in a glass jar is fine. Industrial scale manufacturers probably have a pretty good idea of how to make their own accurate kilogram. 1000ml of 4°C distilled water at sea level... or something.
 
2013-01-07 12:48:31 PM

Atomgirl: "Long-term, however, most scientists want to get away from defining the kilogram based on a hunk of metal."

It appears this artcile was written with the assumption that a kilo is an arbitrary measure. But isn't a kilogram determined by the weight of a liter of water?


That's what I thought.

1kg = the mass of 1L of water
1L = 0.001 cubic meters
1m = so many wavelengths of light from a decaying element, or the distance light travels in a vacuum over a given time
 
2013-01-07 12:49:57 PM

Sim Tree: TofuTheAlmighty: Pfighting Polish: Yes please: "The cylinder, which weighs approximately 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), is the definition of the kilogram."

I saw this myself. Ever notice that, in college, the journalism/comm school tends to have the least intelligent people?

While journalists are typically not the most scientifically literate, the sentence is not incorrect. She didn't write that a kilogram is defined as 2.2 lbs., she noted that a kilogram weighs 2.2. lbs. Though to be most rigorous, she could've written that it weighs 2.2 lbs on Earth.

Perhaps he was referring to the line after 2.2 pounds: "(1 kilogram) is the definition of the kilogram."


It's just poorly written in general. I'm sure the editor added the (1 kilogram) because that's what their editorial standard demands, not because it makes any sense or is necessary in any way. I'm half surprised they didn't say (2.2 pounds) after every mention of the word kilogram throughout the article.
 
2013-01-07 12:58:21 PM
The IPKs are stored in filtered laboratory air at constant temperature and pressure, but there's no way to completely isolate them from air pollution and contamination, Cumpson told LiveScience.

Couldn't you cut down on the air pollution by sucking all the air out of their storage environment? After all, how often can these things get used?
 
2013-01-07 01:12:35 PM
last i heard it was losing weight by abrasion of gloved hands
 
2013-01-07 01:13:43 PM
To clean them, a skilled technician will rub the cylinders with chamois leather dipped in alcohol.

critical-thinkers.com
 
2013-01-07 01:14:39 PM
If the piece of leather used to 'clean' the metal is old, perhaps it is the cause of the mercury contamination? Mercury was once used to process leather.

Also, i'm pretty sure leather has carbon atoms in it.

Maybe they shouldn't have wiped their expensive chunk of metal with alcohol soaked tanned skin?

There's a tanning mom joke in here somewhere, but yo mamma's so fat she's blocked out the sun and I can't see it.
 
2013-01-07 01:17:09 PM

Karac: The IPKs are stored in filtered laboratory air at constant temperature and pressure, but there's no way to completely isolate them from air pollution and contamination, Cumpson told LiveScience.

Couldn't you cut down on the air pollution by sucking all the air out of their storage environment? After all, how often can these things get used?



Vacuums cause outgassing of materials they come in contact with (think of how water boils easier at lower pressures). This vapor could then settle on the object. So you'd have to really clean the storage container, which is harder than cleaning the object itself and filtering the air.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report