Thanks island and others!
What would be the result if you used seawater at SG of 1.022 for buoyancy force rather than freshwater at 1.00? If it makes no difference, that's the answer.

I don't think the depth makes any difference except for gravity and didn't mean to go down that black hole. I should have omitted the word "weight" from my original question and rephrased it as island did above.

If you want to really nerd out see https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/weight-of-objects-as-they-descend-into-the-earth.207148/

Essentially gravitational field becomes stronger in many places just below the earths crust. This being due to the crust being less dense enough to keep us a bit distance away from the really dense part of the planet. Fluffy crust? From there, the maximum, the field is thought to go approximately linearly to zero at the center.

Denser water will create a larger buoyant force than fresh water.

According to this link, the density of the ocean increases the deeper you get and is 1.07 at 10km.
https://www.britannica.com/science/seawater/Density-of-seawater-and-pressure

There are brine pools at the bottom of the ocean like an underwater lake. Like on Spongebobhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1657369602.jpg

I think you need to have another think about that.

I disagree that weight is the total sum of the forces, it’s one force, yes.

Pretty sure that if you do the math the point where the gravitational attraction is the strongest is somewhere partway to the core. It is increasing and you go deeper into the earth, up to a point, but it begins decreasing again.

I learned more than just the answer to my question. A layman's question to an engineer (or lawyer) needs to be unambiguous in terms but you can see the fault there. Also, there are some really sharp folks on here in various fields and interests...not just a few but an overwhelming number

Force (weight) is a vector quantity, meaning it has magnitude and direction. If gravity and buoyancy are acting on a mass, the net force (weight) is the vector addition of the two forces.

Yeah, I've seen some in nature documentary shows. It's cool and a bit crazy to see a "pool" underwater.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgZD2STt_OU/maxresdefault.jpg

Exactly.

That leads to the question that is "Is weight the net force acting on the mass, or is it only the force due to gravity?"

If you look in Webster, it lists the first definition of weight as being something measured by weighing. And then if you look up the verb weigh, it says to measure something as by a scale. So, to me that says that weigh can be how something is measured on a scale which would make it a net force. But, I also absolutely agree that in a physics class at a basic level, weight would be considered the result of one force acting on the mass due to gravity, not the net force.

Using those two definitions, an item that sinks in the ocean is going to weight less in the ocean than in air due to bouyancy (first definition, net force). But also, an item will weigh the same whether it's in the water or not, with the only way to change that weight to determine the exact gravitational constant at the particular point where the item is in reference to earth (second definition, force due to gravity only).

A satellite in orbit is said to be weightless - where the forces (gravity and centripetal) are balanced.

Set that satellite on the moon the weight would measure quite a bit less than if weighed on earth.

So, I think it safe to conclude that the weight of an object is dependent on the environment.

The only way you can claim an item will weigh the same whether it's in the water or not is to imply that you are not concerned about anything other than the mass and/or gravitational field on the object changing.

BUT, that completely ignores the environment specified - and ignores the crux of the OP question, which was specifically the environmental affect of water on the weight of steel.

To avoid ambiguity the term mass is used to isolate, when needed, the physical bulk of an item. When asking about weight, we (engineers) typically consider that the person means mass. But when they throw the Q out with the environment variable (space, moon, ocean) we assume that they do mean to ask about weight (measurable) in that particular environment.

If a 1 kg wench goes down for a ride in a submarine, that 1kg wrench will still be a kg even though it is on a sub that can be considered to be weightless in the water.

This is because we typically consider weight to be the force measurement between solid objects. In this example, the force between the wrench and the sub bench that it rests, and the sub is weighed between the sub and the sea floor.