Articles: The ‘Gang of Five’ and the SI Revolution P. J. Mohr, B. N. Taylor, and D. B. Newell,
• “CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2010,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 1527 (2012, 2008, 2006)
• “The fundamental physical constants,” Phys. Today 60, 52 (2007))
Homepage (and another)
Most recent email: 18 September 2019 @ 11:12 PM
Dear Dr. Peter Mohr:
What an amazing compilation of data within the NIST website! Thank you for your work. In 2011 we were just learning about the Planck units and today we are circling back, reviewing what we learned and trying to appreciate all that we haven’t learned yet. Your website drills that home!
I realize that you report to the entire population of the USA and barely have time to think. Nevertheless, most of our fellow citizens are not groupies. We are! I think what you all are doing holds keys to understanding this world and universe. We thank you, David B. Newell, and Barry N. Taylor (and Eite Tiesinga most recently).
Might one of you be able to take enough time to answer what would be simple questions for you all? Thank you.
Third email: 15 September 2019 @ 2:46 PM NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
Dear Dr. Peter Mohr:
Are there factual errors within the following statement?
“Observation: The value of a second was established by a consortium of government agencies around the world. In 1841 they unofficially began cooperating and sharing insights. In 1947 with the formation of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the first official actions began.
How does one define a second?
“The ancient approximation was 1/86,400 of the time that it takes the Earth to rotate once on its axis. Then, in the 1700s it was determined by the pendulum swing of a carefully-defined grandfather clock, but most recently by the very stable calibrations within the cesium 133 atom. We’ve been advocating that the second could be defined by an exact multiple of Planck Time. At Notation 143, it is .60116 seconds. Why not add that fraction that brings it closest to the current one second mark? This kind of thinking began back in 2012 when we were advocating that a standard length be based on an exact multiple of Planck Length.”
Second email: Fri, Sep 1, 2017, 11:59 AM
Thank you, thank you for all your work:
Your work is much more sensational than you will ever know!
1. May we print out the wall chart for every classroom?
2. May we print wallet cards for every student? (PDF)
3. Given the magnetic constant involves pi, one might imagine that it is non-terminating, non-repeating. Is that true of all numbers where pi is involved within the very definition?
First email: March 20, 2015, 12:03 PM NIST <br> National Institute for Standards and Technology
RE: Extraordinary paper – CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2010 (PDF) Peter J. Mohr, Barry N. Taylor, and David B. Newell, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 1527 – Published 13 November 2012
Thank you for an extraordinary piece of work.
I have just begun to “get into” your article and
I have already learned so much.
Quite a goldmine in there!