Paper detail

On new definitions of SI base units. Why is the "atomic" kilogram preferable

We discuss the role of fundamental constants and measurement data for the Planck, Avogadro and Boltzmann constants and the elementary electric charge in connection with the planned transition to new definitions of four base SI units (the kilogram, mole, ampere and kelvin) in terms of fixed values of these constants. It is proposed to choose a new definition of any base SI unit in terms of a particular fundamental physical constant using a number of criteria, or principles, such as succession relative to the current SI, a sufficient stability of the new unit standards, and concordance between physical dimensions of the unit and the corresponding fundamental constant. It is argued that a redefinition of the kilogram and mole by fixing the values of the atomic mass unit and the Avogadro constant satisfies all these criteria and bears some more advantages against the version with fixed Planck constant: a well founded approach to definition of the ampere and the opportunity to preserve the current relationship between definitions of the mole and the kilogram. It is also argued that the kelvin can be redefined independently of the other three units.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.