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

  • Thread starter Thread starter tuhtles
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the relationship between atomic mass units (u) and grams in the context of molecular weight. One mole of diatomic nitrogen (N2) weighs approximately 28 grams, which corresponds to its atomic weight in grams. The confusion arises from mixing up the weight of a single molecule of N2, which is about 1.6605 x 10^-27 kg, with the weight of a mole. The atomic weight is not simply the sum of protons and neutrons due to factors like mass defect and isotopic variation. The conversation also touches on potential future changes to the definition of the Avogadro constant and atomic mass units.
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.
 
Thread 'Is there a white hole inside every black hole?'
This is what I am thinking. How much feasible is it? There is a white hole inside every black hole The white hole spits mass/energy out continuously The mass/energy that is spit out of a white hole drops back into it eventually. This is because of extreme space time curvature around the white hole Ironically this extreme space time curvature of the space around a white hole is caused by the huge mass/energy packed in the white hole Because of continuously spitting mass/energy which keeps...
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
Back
Top