Measurement Techniques

, Volume 62, Issue 5, pp 396–401 | Cite as

Musing on Use and Misuse of Numerical Data of Quantities in Measurement Science

  • F. PaveseEmail author

The empirical numerical value of a quantity is not a number that can be treated as a simple mathematical object. The digits are not only determined by the chosen reference, but also by the full process that allowed setting them. The evaluation not only is affected by uncertainty, but the uncertainty level can be chosen from many “levels of confidence.” The latter establishes the degree of possibility that the available numerical value is reasonably acceptable as the actual numerical value of the quantity in question. Consequently, there are different ways to treat the digits of the same numerical values expressing the magnitude of the same quantity. This paper illustrates the above issues by using as examples the “fundamental constants” proposed for use in the new SI definition: Planck, Boltzmann, electrical charge, and Avogadro.


  1. 1.
    E. R. Cohen, T. Cvitas, J. G. Frey, et al., IUPAC Commission I1, Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (III ed.): Green Book, RSC, London (2007).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. B. Newell, F. Cabiati, J. Fischer, et al., “The CODATA 2017 values of h, e, k, and NA for the revision of the SI,” Metrologia, 55, 29 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Pavese, Computation from NASA Video of Snow Coverage on the Surface of the Earth in the Past 20 Years by Using a Simple Graphic Method, submitted to Theor. Appl. Climatol. (2018).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    NASA 2017, (videos).
  5. 5.
    CGPM, Resolution 1 of the 26th Meeting, Nov. 16, 2018, BIPM, Sèvres,
  6. 6.
    CIPM, Decisions of the 106th CIPM, Oct. 2017, BIPM, Sèvres, ing/106.html.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IMEKOTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations