Sea water is water from a sea or ocean. On average, sea water in the world's oceans has a salinity of ~3.5%. This means that for every 1 liter (100 0mL) of sea water there are 35 grams of salts (mostly, but not entirely, sodium chloride) dissolved in it. This can be expressed as 0.6M NaCl. Water with this level of osmolality is, of course, not potable.
Sea water is not uniformly saline throughout the world. The planet's freshest sea water is in the Gulf of Finland, part of the Baltic Sea. The most saline open sea is the Red Sea, where high temperatures and confined circulation result in high rates of surface evaporation and there is little fresh inflow from rivers. The salinity in isolated seas (for example, the Dead Sea) can be considerably greater.
The density of sea water is between 1020 and 1030 kg/m3. Due to chemical buffering, seawater pH is limited to the range 7.5 to 8.4.
kilo-bee
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 24 2005, 12:10 PM
Danial, I can tell that you're from the US!
"1 liter (100 0mL)" should be 1 liter (1000 ml), or 1 Litre (1000 mL), or 1 litre (1000 ml) or 1 Liter (1000 mL).
In fact, if you were "metric-savvy" you could simply drop either notation.
Keep learning, though.
JohnS-MI
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 24 2005, 1:19 PM
I think it's a "quoto," a typographical error that crept in as a resulting of cutting and pasting from another web page. The lack of space between the 1000 and the mL is in the original; I have no clue where the space in the middle of the 1000 crept in. Note it does not occur in the density statement.
To be pedantic, the capital L is the preferred symbol in the US, but liter or litre is NOT capitalized as Liter or Litre unless the word begins a sentence. The unit was not named for a Mr. Litre.
However, if one doesn't know what a liter is, explaining that it is one thoudand thousandths of a liter is likely to be confounding. I have no idea why Wikipedia considers it clarifying.
kilo-bee
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 24 2005, 2:26 PM
" I think it's a "quoto," a typographical error that crept in "
It could be, but reading other posts it might be that he's not fully "metric savvy" too.
Anonymous
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 24 2005, 5:24 PM
I don't see how any of this is relevant.
Monkeys live on land.
kilo-bee
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 25 2005, 10:39 AM
Sea-Monkeys (R) don't !
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 25 2005, 12:05 PM
I cut and pasted the article from wikipedia. I have no idea how the space ended up between the zeros.
kilo-bee
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 25 2005, 12:44 PM
I wouldn't worry. If you hang around here long enough then you won't remain a metric novice for long.
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 27 2005, 3:19 AM
<<
I think it's a "quoto," a typographical error that crept in as a resulting of cutting and pasting from another web page.
>>
How does that happen?
JohnS-MI
Re: 1.024 s.g. not 1.025 s.g.
October 27 2005, 4:18 PM
Bud,
I don't know. But I've had it happen especially with nonprinting or "special" characters. They don't c&p accurately. I assume a difference between the font sets, or something.