Archive for the ‘Personal’ Category

Obesity Policy

March 6, 2018
BBC Story Extract

Extract from BBC news story. The annotations in red are mine!

Today the BBC are reporting that:

Britain needs to go on a diet, says top health official

The article states that people should allow:

  • 400 kilo-calories for breakfast
  • 600 kilo-calories for lunch
  • 600 kilo-calories for dinner

which adds up to 1600 kilo-calories a day. With this dietary intake, most adults in sedentary occupations will lose weight or maintain a healthy weight.

However, the article then goes on to say:

It is recommended that women should eat no more than 2,000 kilo-calories a day, while men should limit their intake to 2,500 kilo-calories.

No! As I pointed out previously, this is just too many calories for both men and women with sedentary lifestyles.

Any government campaign based on these figures is bound to fail.

Calories versus Age

For someone of my height and weight, the government’s recommend dietary intake is about 30% too high.

Is weight homeostasis possible?

February 28, 2018

I am slightly obsessed with my weight. Forgive me: I am 58 and have spent many decades repeatedly putting on weight slowly, and then losing it rapidly.

For many years I have wondered why can’t I just eat modestly and trust my body to “sort itself out!”

My recent discovery of the Mifflin St Joer equations (link) has allowed me to  simulate my weight over time, and my calculations are allowing me to understanding my own experience.

But my calculations have also raised a profound question:

  • Is homeostasis of weight even possible?


Homeostasis (or Homoeostasis) is the term given to physiological systems which conspire to keep something constant.

For example, we have systems that maintain our body temperature without any conscious effort. I don’t have to berate myself for being too hot and promise myself that in the future I will try to be cooler.

No. Our bodies sort out their internal temperature. I understand the system consists of temperature sensitive cells and nervous system reflexes that control blood flow, sweat glands, shiver reflexes, and our desire to undertake activity.


And I have generally imagined that in a more perfect world, a similar kind of system would underpin my desire to eat.

In this ideal world, I would naturally maintain my weight without any obvious effort on my part – stopping eating when I had eaten ‘enough’.

I had thought such a system actually existed. One part of the system is supposed to arise from the competing actions of hormones such as ghrelin – which makes us experience hunger – and leptin – which makes us feel satiated.

Together, ghrelin and leptin are supposed to act as part of a system of energy homeostasis.

However, having run many simulations of my own weight versus time (see below) and reflected on this, I am sceptical.

“But I know a bloke who…”

We all know people who seem to be able to eat at their ease and not put on weight.

I have no explanation for that, but then I have never experienced that myself.

My experience is that my weight either increases or decreases over time. What I have never observed it to do in all my 58 years on Earth is to stay the same! (I have written about this before: story 1 or story 2.)

What’s the problem?

I programmed the Mifflin St Joer equations into a spreadsheet to see the predicted effect on my weight of various dietary and exercise choices.

You can download the spreadsheet here and perform calculations about yourself in the privacy of your own computer. 

I entered my current age (58.2 years) and weight (74 kg), and I used the MSJ equations to predict what would happen to my weight if I ate 1800 kiloCalories (kCal) a day.

The results are shown below together with the effect of eating 50 kCal/day more or less

Weight versus Age Projection

  • The red line suggests that if I eat 1800 kCal/day then my weight will gradually decline over the next couple of years stabilising at about 71 kg. That would be dandy.
  • However, the dotted green lines show what would happen if I got my calorific intake wrong by ± 50 kCal per day. This is plus or minus half of a small glass of wine, or a half a biscuit either eaten, or not eaten.

These ‘alternate realities’ predict that my weight in three years time might be anywhere between 64 kg and 77 kg – a range of 13 kg!

To be within a kilogram of the predicted weight, my average energy intake would need to match 1800 kCal/day within 10 kCal a day. That is less than a single mouthful of food!

I don’t believe that any autonomic system can achieve that level of control. 

Weight versus Age Projection 2

So what?

Reflecting on these simulations, I don’t believe that the systems within our bodies that mediate ‘energy homoeostasis’ operate well over many years.

At least they don’t operate well in an environment where calories are so easy to obtain.

So I think my experience of slow weight gain over time is not a fault with my autonomic nervous system, or a moral failing on my part. It is just the way things are.

Asking the thinerati

Asking several slim individuals around the coffee machine this morning confirmed my view. They all were either (a) young (b) self-conscious about fitting into clothes or (c) weighed themselves regularly.

Personally I have resolved to keep weighing myself and using this to provide manual feedback.

How is my weight doing? Thank you for asking. It’s been just about stable since Christmas and I intend to keep it that way!


February 18, 2018


After writing about ‘singing glasses’ previously, I was discussing the effect with my friend and colleague Andrew Hanson.

Have you done the mug thing?” he asked. And proceeded to hit the rim of a mug with a spoon.

As he moved the location at which he struck the mug, the pitch of the note changed.

And then he explained. Looking from the top, if the handle of the mug is at 12 O’clock, then:

  • Striking the mug at 3, 6, 9, or 12 produces one note – a lower note.
  • Striking the mug between 1 & 2, between 4 & 5, between 7 & 8 and between 10 & 11 produced a second note – a higher note.

Mug Vibrations 01

Andrew said the explanation was that in a mug, there are two types of flexural oscillations, and the frequency of the oscillations depends on whether the handle moves or not.

I was fascinated. How had I never noticed that before? And why was the note that sounded when the mug was struck ‘on the quarter hours’ lower?

This is a very long article, and I apologise. But the physics of this phenomenon is complex and it took me a long time to get to the bottom of it.


I picked 5 mugs from our domestic collection which were as straight-sided as possible, and which had walls which were as thin as possible. I thought these choices would make the vibrational spectrum simple.

First I measured the mugs: their diameter and the wall thickness, and then I picked a wooden striker and started hitting the mugs. (Speadsheet)

The place where one strikes the mug produces an oscillation with the striking location as a local maximum of the oscillation.

For a glass, it wouldn’t matter where one struck – any location on the rim is equivalent to any other. But for mugs, the striking position matters because of the handle.

Mug Vibrations 02

To see if I could understand what was going on I arranged the mugs in size order, from the smallest radius to the largest and struck each one three times at each location.

You can hear the sound here.

I also recorded the ‘spectrogram’ using the wonderful Spectrum View app for the iPhone. A screenshot from the app is shown below together with the mugs which made the noise.Mug Vibrations 03.png

A spectrogram shows:

  • time along the horizontal axis
  • frequency along the vertical axis
  • and the loudness of a sound at a particular frequency and time is shown by the colour: blue is quiet and yellow and red are loud.

On the spectrogram above one can see vertical lines which result from the ‘impulse’ sound of me hitting the mugs. This dies away quickly and one is just left with the ‘ringing’ of the mugs which I have outlined with dotted lines.

One can see that each mug rings at two closely-spaced frequencies. The two notes differ in frequency by between 5% and 15%.

Hitting the rim at either location produces mainly one mode of oscillation, but also a little of the other.

Let’s get numerical!

I used the app to locate the frequency of each note and plotted it on a graph of the frequency versus the mug diameter. I plotted each ringing note as a red dot, and their average as a black dot.


There was a general trend to lower frequency for the larger mugs, but the Toronto mug didn’t fit that trend.

I noticed that the walls of the Toronto mug were much thicker than the other mugs. So I wondered whether I could compensate for this by dividing the frequency by the thickness of the wall.

I did this based on the idea that the speed of the wave would be proportional to the  rigidity of the mug wall against bending. And that rigidity might be roughly proportional to the wall thickness. This seemed to be confirmed because the formerly ‘anomalous’ mug frequency now sat quite sweetly on a smooth trend.

Mug Vibrations 05

Now that the data seemed to fit a trend, I felt I was getting a handle on this problem. Could I understand the dependence of the resonance frequency on diameter?


All waves obey the wave formula v = f λ. That is, the speed of the wave, v, is the product of the frequency of the wave, f, and its wavelength  λ.

For the waves on these mugs, the wavelength of the wave which runs around the rim of the cup is just half the perimeter i.e.  λ = π D/ 2 where D is the diameter of the mug.

  • So if all the waves travel with the same speed, then the resonance frequency should vary with diameter as f = 2 v / (π D) i.e. inversely proportional to the diameter.
  • However, for flexural waves, the material supporting the wave becomes floppier at longer wavelengths, and the speed of a flexural wave should fall with increasing wavelength. If this were the case we would expect the resonance frequency to vary inversely as the diameter squared.

Which of the above cases described the data best? I have plotted the two predictions on the graph below.

Mug Vibrations 06

I adjusted the speeds of the waves to match the data for large mugs and then calculated how it should vary for smaller diameter mugs.

Overall I think it is the theory in which the  speed of the flexural wave changes with wavelength that matches the data best.


So now I had a theory that the speed of a flexural wave that runs around the rim of a mug is:

  • Proportional to the wall thickness
  • Inversely proportional to the diameter
    • So the resonance frequencies are inversely proportional to the diameter squared.

After I had finished all these measurements I came across another mug that I could have included in the study – my wife’s ‘Do more of what makes you happy‘ mug.

I decided to see if I could predict its resonant frequency from measurements of its wall thickness and diameter.

I have plotted data on this mug as crosses (×) on the graphs above and I think that overall it fits the trends rather well.

The two notes

If you belong to the minority who have read this far, then well done. It is only you who get to understand the final point about why the ‘quarter hour’ notes are lower.

What is the role of the handle? There are two possibilities.

  • Does it act as an extra mass which slows down the wave?
  • Or does it provide extra stiffness, which would speed up the wave?

Since the quarter hour notes are lower, it seems that it is the extra mass which appears to dominate in the mugs I have examined.


My Weight: Good News or Bad News?

January 5, 2018

I spent most of 2017 feeling bad about my weight.

But as I review the data now I realise I can say positive things about my weight which – if I could believe my own words – would leaving me feeling good about my weight.

Alternatively, I could say negative things which would leave me feeling bad about my weight.

In either case the data would be the same. So which view should I take?

The data

The graph below shows my weight determined first thing in the morning for almost every day throughout the last two years.

Weight 2016-2017

2016 was a good year. I lost about 14 kg and felt enormously better. And in 2017 I initially managed to lose another couple of kilos,

Weight 2017

But then, as work became a nightmare, my weight drifted back up at just 10 g per day – a weight gain equivalent to a biscuit or a glass of wine per day.

By the end of the year I managed to catch my breath enough to slowly lose some weight. And that is pretty much where I am at now.

Postive or Negative?

So how should I feel about this data? What story should I tell myself?

Should I say:

“Well done! You managed to keep control of your weight through a difficult year. And your weight is only 1 kg more than it was at the start of 2017. And still 13 kg lower than it was at the start of 2016”?

Or should I say:

“What a mess! You put on 3 kg through the year!

In either case, the data are the same. So actually I think I will just keep the graphs and refrain from telling myself any story at all. Indeed, the real storyline won’t become clear until I find out what happens next.

I will keep you informed.

2018: Here we come!

January 4, 2018

Top Cat Guide to Life

2017 was a difficult year for me, by far the worst of my 17 years at NPL.

But after a break in which I have managed to breathe, become 58 years old, spend time with my family, and read some books, I have resolved to try to focus on the positive.

At first I thought I would follow advice from the  ‘indisputable leader of the gang’, Mr. Top Cat, from New York City, who has published his ‘Guide to Life‘.

But in fact after reading Mr. Cat’s advice, I can inform you that it is not so much feline, as asinine.

However, his positivity and self-assuredness are enviable, if somewhat (respectively) mysterious and misplaced.

My plan is to reflect on the positive – of which there is plenty – while not ignoring the negative. It’s a tough balance, but nobody said life would be easy.

In any case, if you are reading this, I wish you all the best for the remaining 98.9% of 2018.



December 3, 2017

I can collect my state retirement pension in just 97 months.

The closeness of this date – and its week-by-week countability – is a great comfort to me when I feel under pressure at work.

And one abiding pressure is the requirement that I personally create ‘impact’ from my work.

I had cause to reflect on this when I visited the Royal Society in London last week.

The Royal Society

The Royal Society has a lot of marble and in one portion of that marble is carved its admirable motto.

Nullius in verba


Take nobody’s word for it

This is a reflection of the belief of the founding fellows in the primacy of experimental results over beliefs.

In short, it is a declaration that science has to deal with the world as it is, and not as we would wish it to be.


The Royal Society also has the best door handles I ever seen.


Evoking the double-strands of DNA, I was told the door-handles had to be re-made because the first batch had the wrong chirality!

And just in case you were in doubt about its prestige, its walls are lined with portraits of its past presidents: Newton, Boyle, Darwin, Kelvin, Rutherford, and…

Hans Sloane


Hans Sloane was the president of the Royal Society who followed Sir Isaac Newton: a tough act to follow.

But in terms of ‘impact’ I think he may even have exceeded Newton. History records three great achievements.

  • He founded the Chelsea Physic Garden for the study of plants from all over the world. Mmmm. Not bad.
  • He donated his collection of antiquities to found the British Museum. Mmmm. Impressive.
  • But finally, as recorded on a small label underneath his portrait, is by far his greatest achievement: he invented Milk Chocolate!

Citing Nullius in verba, I am disinclined to believe that he really invented Milk Chocolate. I suspect he re-invented it or modified a previous recipe.

But as I imagine him filling out his annual appraisal form, I feel sure that in the ‘impact’ section, he would have mentioned the popularisation of chocolate as his most significant achievement.

And since his death in 1753, literally billions of human beings have experienced momentary pleasure, or relief from anxiety, by simply eating a small amount of chocolate.

In all of history, has humanity ever had a greater benefactor? 



How do we know anything?

November 18, 2017

How do we know Anything MdeP-NPL

This is an edited video of a talk I gave recently to the NPL Postgraduate Institute about the forthcoming changes to the International System of Units, the SI.

It’s 36 minutes long and you can download the PowerPoint slides here.

It features the first ever public display of the Standard Michael – the artefact defining length in the SM, le systeme de moi, or My System of Units. (It’s shown at about 6 minutes 40 seconds into the video).

The central thesis of the talk is summarised in the slide below:


In the talk I explain how the forthcoming changes to the SI will improve future measurements.

I hope you enjoy it.


Before understanding comes familiarity

November 14, 2017

Averil Horton

It is tough being an adult. Hey. We all know that.

But is especially tough if you realise as an adult that science fascinates you. There are relatively few places where you can go and learn about science  without being condescended to, or treated like a child.

I tried to create such an environment when I ran Protons for Breakfast and my friend Averil Horton is now trialling her ‘Science Club’ with adults.

I am attending as a helper – which is delightfully low stress compared to running a class!

And the key insight of which I have been reminded repeatedly is that experience has to come to before understanding. And for adults, just gaining exposure to the experiential pleasure of hands-on experimentation is so difficult!

I won’t describe the classes in detail, but below I will just post a couple of pictures showing the kinds of things people do. And with the exception of a couple of potentially dangerous things – everyone does everything!

Cutting Potassium…

This slideshow requires JavaScript.



Growing Silver…


Burning Magnesium…


Experiments with density…


Burning hydrocarbons…


And we are not even half way through!

Measuring Temperature with Sound

November 12, 2017


I have just given the first of a series of five talks for The Training Partnership, a company that provide ‘enrichment’ days for A level students.

Since one of my key messages is the importance of measurement in science, I feel obliged to perform some measurements during the presentation.

I find this worrisome, but I think it works well. When it works!

Anyway, with four more presentations to go I thought I would create a page with links to all the the resources I use in the talk.


The PowerPoint presentation can be found here. Please feel free to steal animations if you think they will be helpful, but please give credit to NPL.


During the presentation I use:

  • Audacity for capturing acoustic wave-forms and analysing them: it is astonishing software, and completely free.
  • Sound Card Oscilloscope for detecting the resonance within the spherical resonator: it is excellent and free for educational users. It also comes with a built in oscillator, but for the demo it is much clearer if I use a separate device. So I use…
  • Signal Generator, an app for IOS devices. There many others for both IOS and Android but this one is fine and costs £0.99.

And this is the spreadsheet I use to interpret the results from the experiment.


In my talk I use the same microphone for all the demonstrations, a commercial lapel microphone from RS Components (RS Stock No.242-8911which costs about £20. Similar devices are available from other suppliers.

I chose this particular model because it more robust than home-made contraptions and has a small head – so it fits inside tubes. Larger microphones will work but they tend to damp acoustic waves more strongly.

I hold it in place with a blob of Blutac.

The miniature loudspeaker I use for the resonator demo is quite specialised. It is from a range of products used in headphones, mobile phones and hearing aids produced by the Knowles corporation.

think the model I used is  from this ‘BK’ series. It requires wires to be soldered onto very tiny terminals, and then wired to a 4 mm jack plug that can connect to a mobile phone.

One alternative would be to dismantle a pair of in-ear headphones and just use the loudspeaker from one earphone.

Tube and Resonator

The metal tube I use in the talk is 1.1 metre long stainless steel tube approximately 9.5 mm diameter. You can also use many other types of tubing such as copper or steel plumbing tube.

In general, longer is better for more accurate measurements at room temperature, but it is obviously more difficult to heat it uniformly.

The resonator is a 3-D printed version of the copper resonator we used to measure the Boltzmann constant and make the most accurate temperature measurements in history.

I have placed the 3-D printing files in a zipped folder hereThere are files for the Northern Hemisphere, the Southern Hemisphere, and the plugs. Creating the resonator is quite complicated and I will write a separate blog post on that later.

Good luck!


The Past, Present and Future of Measurement

October 22, 2017

Measurement, the simple process of comparing an unknown quantity with a standard quantity, is the essential component of all scientific endeavours. We are currently about to enter a new epoch of metrology, one which will permit the breath-taking progress of the last hundred years to continue unimpeded into the next century and beyond.

The dawn of this new age has been heralded this week by the publication of an apparently innocuous paper in the journal Metrologia. The paper is entitled:

Data and Analysis for the CODATA 2017 Special Fundamental Constants Adjustment

and its authors, Peter Mohr, David Newell, Barry Taylor and Eite Tiesinga constitute the Committee on Data for Science and Technology, commonly referred to as CODATA. In this article I will try to explain the relevance of CODATA’s paper to developments in the science of metrology.

The Past

The way human beings began to make sense of their environment was by measuring it. We can imagine that our agrarian ancestors might have wondered whether crops were taller or heavier this year than last. Or whether plants grew better in one field rather than another. And they would have answered these questions by creating standard weights and measuring rods.

But to effectively communicate their findings, the standard units of measurement would need to be shared. First between villages, and then towns, and then counties and kingdoms. Eventually entire empires would share a system of measurement.

First units of weight and length were shared. Then, as time became more critical for scientific and technical endeavours, units of time were added to systems of the measurement. And these three quantities: mass, length and time, are shared by all systems of units.

These quantities formed the so-called ‘base units’ of a system of measurement. Many other quantities could be described in terms of these ‘base units’. For example, speeds would be described in multiples of [the base unit of length] divided by [the base unit of time]. They might be [feet] per [second] in one system, or [metres] per [second] in another.

Over the last few hundred years, the consistent improvement in measurement techniques has enabled measurements with reduced uncertainty. And since no measurement can ever have a lower uncertainty that the standard quantity in that system of units, there has been a persistent drive to have the most stable, most accurately-known standards, so that they do not form a barrier to improved measurements.

The Present

Presently, all scientific and technical measurements on Earth are made using the International System of Units, the SI. The naming of this system – as an explicitly international system – represented a profound change in conception. It is not an ‘imperial’ system or an ‘English’ system, but a shared enterprise administered by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM), a laboratory located in diplomatically-protected land in Sèvres, near Paris, France. Its operation is internationally funded by the dozens of nations who have signed the international treaty known as the Convention of the Metre.

In essence, the SI is humanity’s standard way of giving quantitative descriptions of the world around us. It is really an annex to all human languages, allowing all nationalities and cultures to communicate unambiguously in the realms of science and engineering.

Founded in 1960, the SI was based upon the system of measurement using the metre as the unit of length, the kilogram as the unit of mass, and the second as the unit of time. It also included three more base units.

The kelvin and degree Celsius were adopted as units of temperature, and the ampere was adopted as the unit of electric current. The candela was defined as the unit of luminous efficacy – or how bright lights of different colours appear to human beings. And then in 1971 the often qualitative science of chemistry was included in the fold with the introduction of the mole as a unit of amount of substance, a recognition of the increasing importance of analytical measurements.

SI Circle - no constants

The SI is administered by committees of international experts that seek to make sure that the system evolves to meet humanity’s changing needs. Typically these changes are minor and technical, but in 1984 an important conceptual change was made.

Since the foundation of the SI, the ability to measure time had improved more rapidly than the ability to measure length. It was realised that if the metre was defined differently, then length measurements could be improved.

The change proposed was to define what we mean by ‘one metre’ in terms of the distance travelled by light, in a vacuum, in a fixed time. Based on Einstein’s insights, the speed of light in a vacuum, c, is thought to be a universal constant, but at the time it had to be measured in terms metres and seconds i.e. human-scale measurement standards. This proposal defined a metre in terms of a natural constant – something we believe is truly constant.

The re-definition went well, and set metrologists thinking about whether the change could be adopted more widely.

The Future

Typically every four years, CODATA examine the latest measurements of natural constants, and propose the latest best estimate of the values of a range of natural constants.

Measurement Graphic

This is a strange. We believe that the natural constants are really constant, not having changed measurably since the first few seconds of our universe’s existence. Whereas our human standards are at most a few decades old, and (as with all human standards) are subject to slow changes. Surely, it would make more sense, to base our measurement standards on these fundamental constants of the natural world? This insight is at the heart of the changes which are about to take place. The CODATA publication this week is the latest in a series of planned steps that will bring about this change on 20th May 2019.

Constants Graphic

After years of work by hundreds of scientists, the values of the natural constants recommended by the CODATA committee will be fixed – and will form the basis for the new definitions of the seven SI base units.

What will happen on 20th May 2019?

On the 20th May 2019, revised definitions of four of the base units of the SI will come into force. More than 10 years of careful measurements by scientists world-wide will ensure that the new definitions are, as closely as possible, equivalent to the old definitions.

The change is equivalent to removing the foundations underneath a structure and then inserting new foundations which should leave the structure supported in exactly the same way. However the new foundations – being based on natural constants rather than human artefacts – should be much more stable than the old foundations.

If the past is any guide to the future, then in the coming decades and centuries, we can anticipate that measurement technology will improve dramatically. However we cannot anticipate exactly how and where these improvements will take place. By building the SI on foundations based on the natural constants, we are ensuring that the definitions of the unit quantities of the SI will place no restriction whatever on these future possible improvements.

The kilogram

The kilogram is the SI unit of mass. It is currently defined as the mass of the International Prototype of the Kilogram (IPK), a cylinder of platinum-iridium alloy held in a safe at the BIPM. Almost every weighing in the world is, indirectly, a comparison against the mass of this artefact.

On 20th May 2019, this will change. Instead, the kilogram will be defined in terms of a combination of fundamental constants including the Planck constant, h, and the speed of light, c. Although more abstract than the current definition, the new definition is thought to be at least one million times more stable.

The new definition will enable a new kind of weighing technology called a Kibble balance. Instead of balancing the weight of a mass against another object whose mass is known by comparison with the IPK, the weight will be balanced by a force which is calculable in terms of electrical power, and which can be expressed as a multiple of the fundamental constants e, h and c.

The ampere

The ampere is the SI unit of electrical current. It is presently defined in terms of the current which, if it flowed in two infinitely thin, infinitely long, parallel wires would (in vacuum) produce a specified force between the wires. This definition, arcane even by metrologists’ standards, was intended to allow the measurement of the ampere in terms of the force between carefully constructed coils of wire. Sadly, it was out of date shortly after it was implemented.

On 20th May 2019, this will change. Instead, the ampere will be defined in terms of a particular number of electrons per second, each with an exactly specified electrical charge e, flowing past a point on a wire. This definition finally corresponds to the way electric current is described in textbooks.

The new definition will give impetus to techniques which create known electrical currents by using electrical devices which can output an exactly countable number of electrons per second. At the moment these devices are limited to approximately 1 billion (a thousand million) electrons per second, but in future this is likely to increase substantially.

The kelvin

The kelvin is the SI unit of temperature. It is currently defined as the temperature of the ‘triple point of water’. This temperature – at which liquid water, solid water (ice) and water vapour (but no air) co-exist in equilibrium – is defined to be 273.16 kelvin exactly. Glass cells re-creating this conjunction are located in every temperature calibration lab in the world, and every temperature measurement is a comparison of how much hotter a temperature is than the temperature at one position within a ‘triple point of water cell’.

On 20th May 2019, this will change. Instead, the kelvin will be defined in terms of a particular amount of energy per molecule as specified by the Boltzmann constant, kB. This definition finally corresponds to the way thermal energy is described in textbooks.

The requirement to compare every measurement of temperature with the temperature of the triple point of water adds uncertainty to measurements at extremely low temperatures (below about 20 K) and at high temperatures (above about 1300 K). The new definition will immediately allow small improvements in these measurement ranges, and further improvements are expected to follow.

The definition of the degree Celsius (°C) in terms the kelvin will remain unchanged.

The mole

The mole is the SI unit of ‘amount of substance’. It is currently defined as the amount of substance which contains the same number of ‘elementary entities’ as there are atoms in 12 grams of carbon-12. The change in the definition of the kilogram required a re-think of this definition.

On 20th May 2019, it will change. The mole will be defined as the amount of substance which contains a particular, exactly specified, number of elementary entities. This number – known as the Avogadro number, NA – is currently estimated experimentally, but in future it will have fixed value.

The specification of an exact number of entities effectively links the masses of microscopic entities such as atoms and molecules to the new definition of the kilogram.

The ‘New’ SI

On 20th May 2019 four of the seven base units of the SI will be re-defined. But what of the other three?

The second is already defined in terms of the natural frequency of microwaves emitted by atoms of a particular caesium isotope. The metre is defined in terms of the second and the speed of light in vacuum – a natural constant. And the candela is defined in terms of Kcd, the only natural constant in the SI that relates to human beings. So from 20th May 2019 the entire SI will be defined in terms of natural constants.

SI Circle - with constants

The SI is not perfect. And it will not be perfect even after the redefinitions come into force. This is because it is a system devised by human beings, for human beings. But by incorporating natural constants into the definitions of all its base units, the SI has taken a profound step towards being a system of measurement which will enable ever greater precision in metrology.

And who knows what features of the Universe these improved measurements will reveal.

%d bloggers like this: