(BUT NEVER ANSWERED) QUESTIONS

These basic questions, posed in numerous scientific publications and online debates, have still not been answered by the advocates of the proposed New SI.

1. |
How are "students in all disciplines" supposed to comprehend the Planck kilogram, which requires knowledge of both quantum physics and special relativity? |

2. |
What is the proposed introductory-level textbook definition of the Planck kilogram? |

3. |
How is the fixed-Planck kilogram consistent with concrete new evidence that the fine-structure constant, and hence Planck's constant, varies in time and location? |

4. |
Doesn't the proposed redefinition of the mole violate a basic compatibility condition relating it to the kilogram and the Dalton? |

5. |
Is kappa (and hence Mu) changing in time or not? |

6. |
Is kappa (and hence Mu) a new fundamental constant? |

7. |
Aren't the proposed redefinitions of the SI units inconsistent and/or circular? (For example, the unit amount of substance involves the kilogram, the second is defined in terms of the kelvin and the kelvin in terms of the second, and without the availability of the derived real units joule and watt, the kilogram, kelvin, and candela cannot be realized.) |

8. |
What is an "idealized atom" in NIST Lecturer's explanation of the New SI? |

9. |
Doesn't the Planck kilogram require the introduction of a new quantum–mechanical current standard? |

10. |
How is 10^40, the order of magnitude in the numerical constant implicit in the Planck kilogram, compatible with other SI unit definitions, and how is it physically realistic from a practical standpoint? |