<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Replace the Kilogram!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/</link>
	<description>Ideas, innovations and discoveries from the world of science</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 23:31:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Los problemas del kilo &#171; Entrando en mi mundo&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2663</link>
		<dc:creator>Los problemas del kilo &#171; Entrando en mi mundo&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 14:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2663</guid>
		<description>[...] noticia original la he leído aquí a través de Tecnoculto. MeneameBitacorasRedditDeliciousGoogle BuzzFacebookTwitter           [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] noticia original la he leído aquí a través de Tecnoculto. MeneameBitacorasRedditDeliciousGoogle BuzzFacebookTwitter           [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: _ul_was here</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2624</link>
		<dc:creator>_ul_was here</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2624</guid>
		<description>answer is quite simple : 1Kg is 1.000ml of pure water: ( density of water=1) . 
1 liter of water is a cube which measures 10x10x10 centimeters = 1 decimeter cube .
. i&#039;ve lost the definition of the meter ( calculated fraction of the lightspeed), but it can be found easily.
thus , the definition of a Kilogram ( or a gram) is directly relative to the speed of light , wich is supposed to be constant</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>answer is quite simple : 1Kg is 1.000ml of pure water: ( density of water=1) .<br />
1 liter of water is a cube which measures 10x10x10 centimeters = 1 decimeter cube .<br />
. i&#8217;ve lost the definition of the meter ( calculated fraction of the lightspeed), but it can be found easily.<br />
thus , the definition of a Kilogram ( or a gram) is directly relative to the speed of light , wich is supposed to be constant</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2594</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 15:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2594</guid>
		<description>The reason why a litre of water is no longer used as the standard for the kilogram is because it&#039;s highly inaccurate by today&#039;s standards (though it was initially huge step forward in the time of regional inches, feet, and pounds). The drift between the kilogram artifact masses (~70 micrograms) is a major source of concern regarding the definition of mass. What they&#039;re trying to do is to define the kilogram in the terms of something that is far more accurate (perhaps a thousand times more accurate). The main reason for this is that the uncertainty of the kilogram propagates through all the units based on it (quite a few). Using a litre of water as a basis for the kilogram would be a significant step backward in terms of accuracy; there is too much variability in that definition to achieve the accuracy of the prototype kilogram (and even the prototype kilogram&#039;s uncertainty is undesirable).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The reason why a litre of water is no longer used as the standard for the kilogram is because it&#8217;s highly inaccurate by today&#8217;s standards (though it was initially huge step forward in the time of regional inches, feet, and pounds). The drift between the kilogram artifact masses (~70 micrograms) is a major source of concern regarding the definition of mass. What they&#8217;re trying to do is to define the kilogram in the terms of something that is far more accurate (perhaps a thousand times more accurate). The main reason for this is that the uncertainty of the kilogram propagates through all the units based on it (quite a few). Using a litre of water as a basis for the kilogram would be a significant step backward in terms of accuracy; there is too much variability in that definition to achieve the accuracy of the prototype kilogram (and even the prototype kilogram&#8217;s uncertainty is undesirable).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WilliamB</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2591</link>
		<dc:creator>WilliamB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 10:36:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2591</guid>
		<description>Why isn&#039;t the International Prototype Kilogram the same as the mass of one liter of water?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why isn&#8217;t the International Prototype Kilogram the same as the mass of one liter of water?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: World&#8217;s Strangest &#124; Replacing the Kilogram</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2586</link>
		<dc:creator>World&#8217;s Strangest &#124; Replacing the Kilogram</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 20:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2586</guid>
		<description>[...] Link &#124; Image: Clipart [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Link | Image: Clipart [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Replace the Kilogram! &#124; Surprising Science -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/11/replace-the-kilogram/comment-page-1/#comment-2585</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Replace the Kilogram! &#124; Surprising Science -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 18:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/?p=5104#comment-2585</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Gilbert, Camilo Nieto, S. Eric Rhoads, Celuloide, Claire Bryce and others. Claire Bryce said: RT @grumpygamer: Apparently the kilogram is not really a kilogram anymore, a fact I plan on bring up at the deli today: http://bit.ly/9DMiqN [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Gilbert, Camilo Nieto, S. Eric Rhoads, Celuloide, Claire Bryce and others. Claire Bryce said: RT @grumpygamer: Apparently the kilogram is not really a kilogram anymore, a fact I plan on bring up at the deli today: <a href="http://bit.ly/9DMiqN" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/9DMiqN</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
