Paper detail

Stepwise redefinition of the SI base units

The four SI base units are proposed to be redefined in two stages: first, the kilogram, mole and ampere should be defined, and then the kelvin. To realize the redefinition of a base unit of the SI in terms of fundamental physical constant (FPC), a principle of coincidence of their physical dimensions is put forward. Direct applying this principle will lead to the changing of the sets of base and derived units in the new SI. If we want to preserve the continuity of the division between base and derived units in the new and the current SI, the principle is to be generalized with the time dimension factor be included. The status of the mole as the base unit of measurement is considered in the current and new SI. It is proposed to redefine the kilogram using a fixed value of the Avogadro constant and then to redefine the kelvin, after the measurement accuracy of the Boltzmann constant has been increased and agreed with the values of other constants of molecular physics.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.