Gold price at near speed of light

[virtually_yours]

@DPRK

If the gold balances a certain weight on Earth, it will balance the same weight on the Moon, Jupiter, Mars, the underworld, or anywhere else. Except for a weightless environment where traditional scales may not work too well.

Excellent response, I didn’t think of that, the other side of the scale. vy VY

[rat_avatar]

If the goal industry had gone metric the difference in local gravity wouldn’t have mattered though

Resolution of the 3rd CGPM (1901, CR, 70)

The Conference declares
[ul]
[li]The kilogram is the unit of mass; it is equal to the mass of the international prototype of the kilogram;[/li][li]The word “weight” denotes a quantity of the same nature as a “force”: the weight of a body is the product of its mass and the acceleration due to gravity; in particular, the standard weight of a body is the product of its mass and the standard acceleration due to gravity;[/li][li]The value adopted in the International Service of Weights and Measures for the standard acceleration due to gravity is 980.665 cm/s2, value already stated in the laws of some countries.[/li][/ul]

But that resolution has been ignored for over a century now by people claiming to be using the Metric System or SI. Really local weight or apparent weight but not weight in the context of the Metric System or SI, because they use a hard definition based on defined constants. If you your local gravity is not 980.665 cm/s2 you have to correct for it under the Metric System an SI even on earth if you care about accuracy. If you visit any gold assayer, ask them and they will show you their calibration weight set and if it doesn’t have a valid certification run away as fast as you can.

Obviously if you bring your own definition your ‘weight’ may vary.

While BIPM documents tend to be emotionalism, I can’t help but notice the underlying frustration in even the new draft’s verbiage.

https://www.bipm.org/utils/en/pdf/si-revised-brochure/Draft-SI-Brochure-2018.pdf

The 3rd CGPM (1901, CR, 70), in a declaration intended to end the ambiguity in common usage concerning the use of the word “weight”, confirmed that “the kilogram is the unit of mass; it is equal to the mass of the international prototype of the kilogram”. The complete version of these declarations appears on p. 68.

[KarlGauss]

@bob_2

I assume that this is a whoosh and not a serious question.

Hmmm, I don’t know about this OP, but here is an analysis of a somewhat related very serious question considered by a nobel prize winner.

[LowSignalToNoise]

2007: Brookhaven RHIC - explain xkcd

(Apologizes if this has been posted before.)