Abstract
This discussion puts a case of advocatus diaboli: that the Treaty of the Metre, its associated administrative apparatus and the International System of measurement units (SI) has basically failed for chemical measurement and is largely irrelevant to modern analysis, much of practical measurement in modern economies and much of recent technology. The practical use of the chemical unit termed the mole, the introduction to the SI units of the thermodynamic mole and the invention of a new physical quantity called “amount of substance” are each reviewed with the conclusion that the current means of expressing the results of chemical measurements are unsatisfactory in both practice and theory and are imposing large and readily avoidable costs on all advanced economies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Poposki N, Majcen N, Taylor P (2009) Assessing publicly financed metrology expenditures against economic parameters. Accred Qual Assur 14:359–368. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0538-3
Silsbee F (1949) Establishment and maintenance of the electrical units, National Bureau of Standards Circular 475, 30 June, Gaithersburg, USA
Price G (2002) An arrogance of technicians. Accred Qual Assur 7:77–78. doi:10.1007/s00769-001-0426-y
Price G (2001) On the communication of measurement results. Measurement 29:293–305. doi:10,1016/s0263-2241(00)00053-1
Price G (2003) Traceability to units. Accred Qual Assur 8:475–476. doi:10.1007/s00769-003-0599-7
De Boer J (1968–1970) Some general aspects of the international system of units. Recuil de Traveaux du BIPM, volume 2, Sevres
Mills I, Milton M (2009) Amount of substance and the mole. Chemistry International volume 31 No 2 http://www.iupac.org/publications/ci/20093102/1_mills.html
Price G, De Bievre P (2009) Simple principles for metrology in chemistry: identifying and counting. Accred Qual Assur 14:295–305. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0529-4
Mills I, Mohr T, Taylor B, Williams E (2006) Redefinition of the kilogram, ampere, Kelvin and mole: a proposed approach to implementing CIPM recommendation 1 (Cl-2005). Metrologia 43:227–246. doi:10.1088/0026-1394/43/3/006
De Bievre P (2008) Essential for metrology in chemistry, but not yet achieved: truly internationally understood concepts and associated terms. Metrologia 45:335–341. doi:10.1088/0026-1394/45/3/011
Toman B, Possolo A (2009) Laboratory effects models for interlaboratory comparison. Accred Qual Assur 14:553–563. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0547-2
Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board (1999) Phase 1 Report Nov 10 NASA ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/reports/1999/MCO_report.pdf
Price G (1997) Traceability in analysis: why 19th century physics makes lousy 21st century chemistry. Metrology Society of Australia: Proceedings of the second biennial conference, pp 289–294
De Bievre P (2006) Counting is measuring: learning from the banks? Accred Qual Assur 11:1–2. doi:10.1007/s00769-006-0090-3
De Bievre P (2007) Numerosity versus mass. Accred Qual Assur 12:221–222. doi:10.1007/s00769-007-0268-3
De Bievre P (2009) What is our best measured when measuring “something” in “something”. Accred Qual Assur 14:177–178. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0501-3
Johansson I (2008) Functions and shapes in the light of the international system of units. Metaphys Int J Ontol Metaphys 9:93–117. doi:10.1007/s12133-008-0025-7
Mills I (1994/1995) Unity as a unit. Metrologia 31:537–541. doi: 10.1088/0026-1394/31/6/013
Dybkaer R (2004) Units for quantities of dimension one. Metrologia 41:69–73. doi:10.1088/0026-1394/41/1/010
Quinn T, Mills I (1998) The use and abuse of the terms percent, parts per million and parts in 10n. Metrologia 35:807–810. doi:10.1088/0026-1394/35/6/3
White D, Nicholas J (2001) Comment on Quinn and Mills’ proposal for the uno. Metrologia 38:369–371. doi:10.1088/0026-1394/38/4/10
Acknowledgments
I thank the editors and referees for their dialogue as well as their patience. The still fallible discussion before you is very much the better for their engagement but all errors remain my responsibility. I join the editors in cordially inviting further discussion.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Papers published in this section do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Editors, the Editorial Board and the Publisher.
A critical and constructive debate in the Discussion Forum or a Letter to the Editor is strongly encouraged!
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Price, G. Failures of the global measurement system. Part 1: the case of chemistry. Accred Qual Assur 15, 421–427 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-010-0655-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00769-010-0655-z