No revisionism. All they are doing is instead of stating a single number with uncertainties based on varying isotopic rations, they are specifying a range of values based on varying isotopic rations. SAME-SAME. Just in a different view.
“No revisionism. All they are doing is instead of stating a single number with uncertainties based on varying isotopic rations, they are specifying a range of values based on varying isotopic rations. SAME-SAME. Just in a different view.”
Not the same at all. Big, big difference. The old definition has the atomic mass of every element as a ratio of C-12. Now, this is no longer the case. Which is exactly the point I was trying to hammer home earlier.
The relative abundances of each element is irrelevant.