The mole is an Avogadro number of entities, the macroscopic unit for chemical amount

Leonard, B. P.

doi:10.1007/s00769-014-1047-6

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of the entity (my suggested symbol: ent) [6][7][8][9][10][11] is helpful for understanding the meaning of amount of substance, the mole and the Avogadro constant. One entity is simultaneously: (i) an inclusive descriptive term for atom, molecule, subatomic particle, ion, radical, .…”

Section: The Atomic-scale Unit For Amount Of Substance: the Entitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The definition of the Avogadro number is N Avo = g/Da, stemming from expressing substance mass in terms of grams rather than daltons, and observing the mathematical identity: g ≡ (g/Da) Da. The Avogadro number is independent of amount of substance, the mole and the Avogadro constant [6][7][8][9][10][11].…”

Section: The Avogadro Constant Boltzmann Constant and Elementary Chargementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comment on ‘Dimensionless units in the SI’

Leonard

2015

Metrologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In their paper, Mohr and Phillips demonstrate that the SI's representation of 'plane angle' as dimensionless rather than as an independent dimensional quantity continues to create confusion. The authors also address perceived problems in terminology regarding numbers of items, such as discrete events or particles. However, their general philosophy of equating the dimensionless 'number of items' to '(number of items) × (item name)' leads to false conclusions, such as that the hertz is equal to 2π radians per second, and therefore not a coherent SI unit. In attempting to specify kinds of entities, the authors introduce descriptive labels into their supposed 'units,' resulting in confusion between number of entities and amount of substance. And, in discussing the mole and related fundamental constants, they incorrectly portray the Avogadro constant as a conversion factor, identically equal to 1, thereby corrupting the relationships between the Boltzmann constant and the universal gas constant, and between the elementary charge and the Faraday constant. In my comment, I explain and correct these and related errors.

show abstract

Section: The Atomic-scale Unit For Amount Of Substance: the Entitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Avogadro Constant Boltzmann Constant and Elementary Chargementioning

confidence: 99%

Comment on ‘Dimensionless units in the SI’

Leonard

2015

Metrologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Likewise, the quantity name 'amount of substance' has been criticized as "not well chosen" [112] and "is practically unknown to most teachers" [70]. Leonard argues that the name for the base quantity should be 'chemical amount', by analogy with 'electric current' [113]. In fact, 'chemical amount' had appeared as the alternative name for 'amount of substance' in the IUPAC Green Book since 1993 [114].…”

Section: Name Of the Quantitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review of the proposed definitions of fundamental chemical quantities and their impact on chemical communities (IUPAC Technical Report)

Marquardt

Meija

Mester

et al. 2017

Pure and Applied Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the proposed new SI, the kilogram will be redefined in terms of the Planck constant and the mole will be redefined in terms of the Avogadro constant. These redefinitions will have some consequences for measurements in chemistry. The goal of the Mole Project (IUPAC Project Number 2013-048-1-100) was to compile published work related to the definition of the quantity 'amount of substance', its unit the 'mole', and the consequence of these definitions on the unit of the quantity mass, the kilogram. The published work has been reviewed critically with the aim of assembling all possible aspects in order to enable IUPAC to judge the adequateness of the existing definitions or new proposals. Compilation and critical review relies on the broadest spectrum of interested IUPAC members.

show abstract

“…B. P. Leonard has argued for the term chemical amount, 8 and the IUPAC project task group critically evaluating proposals on chemical quantities in the new SI endorses that name. 5 Recognizing that the quantity in question is an amount of some sort, but noting that the word amount is very general, Leonard and the task group propose modifying it with another word describing the kind of amount.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Name? Amount of Substance, Chemical Amount, and Stoichiometric Amount

Giunta

2016

J. Chem. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term stoichiometric amount is proposed as a substitute or a synonym for the problematic SI-base quantity amount of substance. The word stoichiometric not only makes the term highly specific in modifying the word amount, but also signals that the expression is a technical term rather than a phrase of common English words. The term can be usefully employed in explaining the mole (i.e., as a unit of stoichiometric amount) regardless of the official name of the quantity of which the mole is a unit. It can be used alongside the phrase chemical amount, which has previously been proposed as an alternative to amount of substance.

show abstract

The mole is an Avogadro number of entities, the macroscopic unit for chemical amount

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Comment on ‘Dimensionless units in the SI’

Comment on ‘Dimensionless units in the SI’

A critical review of the proposed definitions of fundamental chemical quantities and their impact on chemical communities (IUPAC Technical Report)

What’s in a Name? Amount of Substance, Chemical Amount, and Stoichiometric Amount

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About