This level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I made a change to the caption to the right of the fulcrum, no matter what gravity was (ignoring the mass of whatever you're balancing them on). Therefore anything using levers is properly termed a balance. Any device using a spring is based upon force which is dependent on gravity and therefore a scale. Most bathroom scales use springs however the type in the image at the beginning of this article uses a lever/counterbalance method. Shouldn't the caption call it a balance instead of the inaccurate scale? Can someone with some physics knowledge back me up or refute me please. Vicarious 20:54, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm under the impression that we British would be more likely to talk about "scales" than "a scale" but I have no objective evidence to back that up whatsoever. Does anybody have a source for the article's current suggested common usage? — 80.177.129.251 11:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm under the same impression for Irish. Maybe scale is just American? 92.251.255.13 (talk) 14:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
It actually depends on the area of application. In the laboratory it is generally referred to as a "balance". Outside of the laboratory - food, industry, retail, it is typically a "Scale" or "Scales" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.68.2.132 (talk) 16:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The two main types of scales are the balance scale and spring scale. In classical physics, a balance scale can only directly measure mass (from which weight can be interpolated based on g -- the gravitational constant), wherease a spring scale can only directly measure weight (from which mass can be interpolated when g is known). In physics, weight and force are actually the same thing and the formula for relating weight to mass is F = mg.
Therefore symantically a balance scale cannot be called a weighing scale, as far as rigid physics definitions are concerned. That said, mass and weight are interchangeable in common usage. In fact, the word "weighing" is defined in dictionaries as balancing weights! How confusing.
So I recommend you change "is a device for measuring the weight of an object" to "is a device for measuring either the weight or mass of an object, depending on the design." Then you can (you pretty well already do) introduce the two topics of balance scale and spring scale by stating what they directly mesaure and what can be interpolated from the measurement.
On the topic of whether "scale" should be plural or singular, one has to look at the root meaning of scale, which is "dish" or "bowl". The classic weighing scale is the two dishes and the balanced lever, hence the word "scales" was used to define the whole apparatus. Again, symantically, if a modified design (eg., a spring scale or a balance scale with sliding weights at one end of the lever)has only one dish, then it should be called a singular "scale". But, the word "scale" has taken on a new meaning, referring to any complete weighing apparatus, and "scales" thus has equal meaning, the difference being local preferred usage. Yes, I would agree that "scales" is the common British usage and "scale" is common in Canada (where I live) and the USA. I do not know about other English speaking countries but we can assume they mostly use "scales".
--Jstreutker 22:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
A point was made on the science help desk that balances, used in an atmosphere, do not really measure mass, because of the buoyancy that the Achimedes effect introduces in objects of different volume. As an extreme example, imagine a helium ballon that is just-just "in balance" in room air - meaning that its tendency to drop because of gravity is exactly balanced by its tendency to rise because it is less dense than air. If placed on a beam balance, the balance would show no weight on the basin. In space the mass would be more than the buoyancy, and the maas would be "revealed". The article should be changed accordingly, but unfortunately a large number of textbooks carry this error. --Seejyb 22:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Seems to be too much repetition about the distinction between weight and mass. Glueball 18:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Pan balance links to this article but is not covered. Pgr94 10:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
I was looking for information on the typical bathroom scale, like what type of scale it is, how it works, etc, but couldn't find anything like that in this article. --jwandersTalk 06:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
go to thinkingfountain.com and go to the the blank box that is under search and search balance and click the first topic one and go to it that is why im giong to research for balance scales for i can read and do the rest of research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.63.198.230 (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
The following original edition should be presented with reliable references
--222.67.203.108 (talk) 01:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
The topic has been researched for a long time
--222.67.203.108 (talk) 01:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.67.203.108 (talk) 01:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
"By the 1940s various electronic devices were being attached to these designs to make readings more accurate. These were not true digital scales as the actual measuring of weight still relied on springs and balances.[17][18] "
... is confused. What makes scales digital is the use of digital electronics, which is a different matter to whether springs or other mechanics are used in or before the sensor. 82.31.66.207 (talk) 01:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Article says: "For high precision work, the center beam balance is still one of the most accurate technologies available[citation needed], and is commonly used for calibrating test weights."
I have to call shenanigans here. A good digital balance can be accurate to 5 significant decimal places - can you do that with a center beam balance? And mass comparators, not beam balances, are usually used for calibrating test weights.
Can someone else confirm, and then remove this misleading quote from the article? 152.51.56.1 (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
The idea of balance is beautiful. It’s Like that moment when you were on the swings as a kid kicking hi in order to get higher and higher and that moment that you are suspended at the top just before you come back down were you almost freezing time… that’s amazing #timestopped what’s your moment? Be creative. Post a photo, a poem, upload a track, or a clip of you dancing your #flexout Share you moment of joy with the world! I dare you to… #FLexdare 2601:18E:C401:F00:9A6:9B9B:827D:1A17 (talk) 03:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
The first sentence of the section: "The balance scale is such a simple device that its usage likely far predates the evidence." contradicts the second sentence of the second paragraph: The oldest evidence for the existence of weighing scales dates to c. 2400–1800 BC in the Indus River valley. Prior to that, no banking was performed due to lack of scales. (emphasis mine). In November 2011 this article saw some minor ip vandalism, eg Special:Diff/518490970. The statement about no banking was added around the same time: Special:Diff/518502820. It's not clear if it was intended as test vandalism, or a user drawing a conclusion without a source, but either way, I'm removing it. Jd2718 (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)