Mass defects in atomic massesThe pattern in the amounts the atomic masses deviate from their mass numbers is as follows: the deviation starts positive at hydrogen-1, becomes negative until a minimum is reached at iron-56, iron-58 and nickel-62, then increases to positive values in the heavy isotopes, with increasing atomic number. This equals to the following: nuclear fission in an element heavier than iron produces energy, and fission in any element lighter than iron requires energy. The opposite is true of nuclear fusion reactions: fusion in elements lighter than iron produces energy, and fusion in elements heavier than iron requires energy. Measurement of atomic massesDirect comparison and measurement of the masses of atoms is achieved with mass spectrometry. Conversion factor between atomic mass units and gramsThe standard scientific unit for dealing with atoms in macroscopic quantities is the mole (mol), which is defined arbitrarily as the amount of a substance with as many atoms or other units as there are in 12 grams of the carbon isotope C-12. The number of atoms in a mole is called Avogadro's number, the value of which is approximately 6.022 × 1023 mol-1. One mole of a substance always contains almost exactly the relative atomic mass or molar mass of that substance (which is the concept of molar mass), expressed in grams; however, this is almost never true for the atomic mass. For example, the standard atomic weight of iron is 55.847 g/mol, and therefore one mole of iron as commonly found on earth has a mass of 55.847 grams. The atomic mass of an 56Fe isotope is 55.935 u and one mole of 56Fe will in theory weigh 55.935g, but such amounts of pure 56Fe have never existed. The formulaic conversion between atomic mass and SI mass in grams for a single atom is: where u is the atomic mass unit and NA is Avogadro's number. Relationship between atomic and molecular massesSimilar definitions apply to molecules. One can compute the molecular mass of a compound by adding the atomic masses of its constituent atoms (nuclides). One can compute the molar mass of a compound by adding the relative atomic masses of the elements given in the chemical formula. In both cases the multiplicity of the atoms (the number of times it occurs) must be taken into account, usually by multiplication of each unique mass by its multiplicity. HistoryIn the history of chemistry the first scientists to determine atomic weights were John Dalton between 1803 and 1805 and Jöns Jakob Berzelius between 1808 and 1826. Atomic weight was originally defined relative to that of the lightest element hydrogen taken as 1.00. In the 1860's Stanislao Cannizzaro refined atomic weights by applying Avogadro's law (notably at the Karlsruhe Congress of 1860). He formulated a law to determine atomic weights of elements: the different quantities of the same element contained in different molecules are all whole multiples of the atomic weight and determined atomic weights and molecular weights by comparing the vapor density of a collection of gases with molecules containing one or more of the chemical element in question [5]. In the early twentieth century, up until the 1960's chemists and physicists used two different atomic mass scales. The chemists used a scale such that the natural mixture of oxygen isotopes had an atomic mass 16, while the physicists assigned the same number 16 to the atomic mass of the most common oxygen isotope (containing eight protons and eight neutrons). However, because oxygen-17 and oxygen-18 are also present in natural oxygen this led to two different tables of atomic mass. The unified scale based on carbon-12, 12C, met the physicists' need to base the scale on a pure isotope, while being numerically close to the old chemists' scale. The term atomic weight is being phased out slowly and being replaced by relative atomic mass, in most current usage. The history of this shift in nomenclature reaches back to the 1960's and has been the source of much debate in the scientific community. The debate was largely created by the adoption of the unified atomic mass unit and the realization that weight was in some ways an inappropriate term. The argument for keeping the term "atomic weight" was primarily that it was a well understood term to those in the field, that the term "atomic mass" was already in use (as it is currently defined) and that the term "relative atomic mass" was in some ways redundant. In 1979, in a compromise move, the definition was refined and the term "relative atomic mass" was introduced as a secondary synonym. Twenty years later the primacy of these synonyms was reversed and the term "relative atomic mass" is now the preferred term; however the "standard atomic weights" have maintained the same name. [6] Table of standard atomic weightsFor more accurate standard atomic weights, including uncertainties , see Periodic table (detailed).
See alsoExternal linksReferences
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||