Sorry, perhaps this is a disciplinary difference. In engineering, physics, and biomechanics (my doctoral specialization), and from a unit standard perspective, the pound representing both mass and weight is a false equivalency born out of convenience. This is why the Imperial standard for mass is the slug, allowing for gravitational acceleration of a mass to equate to a force.
Wait what? Even if you’re measuring mass both times?
Kilograms are mass, but pounds are weight. Therefore 0 kg = 0 slug, or 0 N = 0 lbs
I thought pounds could be used for either mass or force, and in modern usage just saying “pounds” usually refers to mass. Wikipedia seems to agree:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(force)
Yeah this is exactly why I was confused. Pounds can definitely be used to measure mass. So the guy was wrong and assuming stupid parameters
Sorry, perhaps this is a disciplinary difference. In engineering, physics, and biomechanics (my doctoral specialization), and from a unit standard perspective, the pound representing both mass and weight is a false equivalency born out of convenience. This is why the Imperial standard for mass is the slug, allowing for gravitational acceleration of a mass to equate to a force.
You’re right, “pounds” is ambiguous.