What is heavier: a kilogram of feathers or kilogram of lead

>>8203212

That is weight is measured in newtons.

Therefore 1kg of lead is heavier.

Being more dense doesn't change anything if the weight total is 1 kg.

>>8203218

Yeah I just realized I am an idiot. Thanks Yahoo! Ansers :)

"1 kilogram is a mass. Weight is mass times the accelleration due to gravity, which on earth is about 9.8 meters per second squared. Thus both the feathers/butter and the lead weigh about 9.8 newtons or 2.2 pounds. "

>>8203212
If they're on the same table then the lead will weigh more because more of it is closer to the earth so more gravity.

>>8203212
Given a kilogram of feathers and a kilogram of steel, I'd wager that the steel exerts a larger downward force.

My reasoning is that a big bag of feathers experiences some degree of tidal forces due to its size.

>>8203221
well yes but the difference is extremely fucking small

>>8203221
Don't forget buoyancy...

>>8203300
Yeah I know but OP wants to know which one ~~technically~~ weighs more so there you go.

>>8203212
It depends on the center of gravity. If I have a 1 kg cube of feathers (at normal density) and a 1 kg cube of lead (at normal density) and place them in on a level scale in the same gravity well (i.e. put them on a typical planet, like say earth). Then the center of gravitry of the lead is closer to the center of gravity of the planet, thus more pull by a very very small amount. So in this case lead would be heavier.

However, if the reference point or geometry is changed, to accommodate for the center of gravity distance then they would be the same. That also includes a idealistic null or self referencing point as the amount of matter is the same so under any of those conditions they are equal.

We can say that under assumption A lead is heavier, under assumption B they are equal, and under assumption C the feathers are heavier. So it really depends on how you set it up.
Reference points and relativity matter when dealing with matter.

However in the typical example (as this video displays) of just setting them on a scale on earth the lead is often heavier by a very small amount as they didn't adjust for the lower center of gravity, but the amount of mass is the same.

>>8203212
Depends on where they are. A kilogram of feathers on the Earth will weigh more than a kilogram of lead on the moon.

AH DOONT GEHT ET

>>8203212
>>8203501
You have to link the fucking video, guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH0hikcwjIA

>>8203212
the weight of each object gets reduced by the weight of the liquid (or gas) it displaces.
so if they are surrounded by any gas or liquid the lead will be heavier

>>8203212
It depends on whether the lead and feathers are on different planets

>>8204388
Christ. Weight is literally just the gravitational force. No other force is considered, so they weight the same.

>>8204545
No he's right: it's buoyancy. Same reason a 10,000 ton boat floats while a 10,000 ton rubix cube would sink. Density does have some relevance when an object is in a fluid.

Of course Kilagram of Stew is heavier.

>>8203212
A kilogramme of steele weighs more, because steele weighs more than feathers

>>8203215
You dumbfuck

>>8204595
Thas righ'. Because Stew, is heavier than feath'rs