sloan wrote:No, no, no....multiply one scale's reading by 2! If that's not right...then you probably aren't standing still enough, and your method won't work, either!
No, Ken. You can still bias the weight to one scale or the other by leaning, and do it with sufficient stability not to create a dynamic transfer of weight from one scale to the other. Your method will double the error of any bias, mine will eliminate it.
Think of it this way: Place a stiff beam such that the ends are supported by scales. Then, apply the load one-quarter of the way along the beam from one end. The scale on that end will read higher, but the total weight of the load plus the beam will be the sum of the two scales. With no movement, the readings will be stable, but neither scale will tell the story by itself. Now, think of that beam as your pelvis.
Rick "figuring the movement of eyeballs insufficient to cause the scales to wander" Denney