Area percent versus weight percent: the confusion that causes most arguments — what changed since

Area percent versus weight percent: the confusion that causes most arguments — what changed since Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did.

What changes if the standard account of Area percent versus weight percent is wrong? I ask because I have been treating it as settled and I noticed this week that I could not say why.

Working through the consequences rather than the evidence, since others here are better placed on the evidence.

Picking up post #9: that is the part I would want checked first.

I read the earlier replies on Area percent versus weight percent twice before writing this, because I had assumed the opposite and wanted to be sure I was disagreeing with what was said rather than what I expected.

Before anything else: what was the gradient, and at what wavelength? Area percent at different wavelengths is not the same number even on the same sample because different species absorb differently at different wavelengths. With the method stated, I can tell you something useful. Without it, all I can say is that there is one large peak.

Thank you for the correction. I would rather find out here than later.

Method validation is the demonstration that a method can separate the compound from its degradation products and impurities reliably. A method that cannot resolve an impurity from the parent peak will not detect that impurity.

I would rather post the uncertainty than round it away.