View source for Talk:Atomic weight

--[[User:Ionworker|Ionworker]] 12:27, 6 Jan 2005 (CST)

The name '''atomic weight''' should no longer be used for a mass quantity, because weight is a force, not a mass.

----

The [[Gold Book]] entry for [http://www.nicmila.org/Gold/Output/A00505.xhtml atomic weight] just referes back to [http://www.nicmila.org/Gold/Output/R05258.xhtml relative atomic mass]. By the way, there is an [http://www.iupac.org/divisions/II/II.1/II1_01min.html IUPAC Commission on Atomic Weights and Isotopic Abundances], so the atomic weight terminology is well entrenched (which isn't to say that it shouldn't change).

:-- [[User:Kkmurray|K. Murray]] 14:52, 6 Jan 2005 (CST)