Why is 1 u = 1.6605 x 10^-27 kg?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tuhtles
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the relationship between moles and atomic mass, specifically addressing the confusion surrounding the weight of 1 mole of diatomic nitrogen (N2). It is established that 1 mole of N2 weighs 28 grams, which is equivalent to 0.028 kg, while the mass of a single molecule of N2 is approximately 4.6494 x 10^-26 kg. The distinction between moles and individual molecules is emphasized, highlighting the importance of understanding the atomic weight in grams versus kilograms. Additionally, the conversation touches on the implications of redefining the Avogadro constant and atomic mass units.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of moles and molar mass in chemistry
  • Familiarity with atomic mass units (u) and their conversion to kilograms
  • Basic knowledge of molecular composition and isotopes
  • Concept of mass-energy equivalence in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of Avogadro's number and its significance in chemistry
  • Learn about the differences between atomic weight and molecular weight
  • Explore the implications of mass defect and binding energy in nuclear chemistry
  • Investigate the current definitions and potential changes to the atomic mass unit
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, educators, and professionals in scientific research who seek to deepen their understanding of molecular weights and the principles of atomic mass.

tuhtles
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Sorry if this is a dumb question.. maybe I'm largely overlooking something..

For example, 1 mol of N2 (diatomic nitrogen gas) is apparently equal to 2 x (14u) x 1.6605 x 10^-27 kg/u = 4.6494 x 10^-26 kg

Why is 1 mol of N2 not equal to (1 mol N2) x 28 g N2/1 mol N2 = 28 g = .028 kg??

These two values are quite different..

Again, sorry it this is a dumb question! I think there's something I'm not understanding??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are mis-reading something, or there is a misprint. 1 mole of atoms weighs the atomic weight in grams (well, nearly) - so 1 mole of N2 weighs 28g, as you say. 1 molecule of N2 weighs around 10-26kg. 1 mole is usually written 1mol, which is the SI abbreviation. Is it possible that there's a mol(ecule) and mol(e) mix-up?

Edit: By the way, I like "quite different". You have a way with understatement.
 
Ibix said:
1 mole of atoms weighs the atomic weight in grams (well, nearly)
Exactly, it is the (current) definition of 1 mole.

There are ideas to fix the avogadro constant, but this would include a re-definition of the atomic mass unit and change the atomic weights (at the 8. decimal place or something like this). 1 mole would stay the same.
 
Yes - apologies, I was confused. The mass in grams of a mole of anything is numerically equal to the atomic/molecular weight in Daltons. However, the atomic weight is not the same as the number of protons plus the number of neutrons in general because of (a) the mass defect and (b) the isotopic mix.
 
there is also the whole binding energy with mass/energy equivilence to think about.

for those reasons we have fusion and fission energy production.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
Replies
9
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K