<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Norman E. Holden</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Tyler B. Coplen</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2011</dc:date>
  <dc:description>Many of us were taught that the standard atomic weights we found in the back of our chemistry textbooks or on the Periodic Table of the Chemical Elements hanging on the wall of our chemistry classroom are constants of nature. This was common knowledge for more than a century and a half, but not anymore. The following text explains how advances in chemical instrumentation and isotopic analysis have changed the way we view atomic weights and why they are no longer constants of nature</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>IUPAC</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Atomic weights: No longer constants of nature</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>