Re: [Phys-l] definitions ... purely operational, or not

[carmelo@pacific.net.sg]

Quoting carmelo@pacific.net.sg:
> This is not "Bartlett" definition. The ISO standard ISO 31-3 (1992)
> defines weight as follows:
>
> The weight of a body in a specified reference system is that force
> which, when applied to the body, would give it an acceleration equal
> to the local acceleration of free fall in that reference system.
>
> Bartlett's paper in TPT should have cited ISO standard ISO 31-3 (1992).

Although Bartlett mentions that he is indebted to Iona on the concept  
of weight, he could have cited at least one of the following papers:

Iona M. (1975) The Meaning of Weight. The Physics Teacher. 5 p263-274.
Iona M. (1978) Why is g larger at the poles. American Journal of  
Physics. 46(8) 790-791.
Iona M. (1987) Weightlessness is Real. The Physics Teacher. 10 p418.
Iona M. (1988) Weightlessness and Microgravity. The Physics Teacher. 2 p72.
Iona M. (1995) International Weight. American Journal of Physics. 63, 2 p106.
Iona M. (1999) Weight – An Official Definition. The Physics Teacher. 4 p238.