Notices
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Atomic mass and atomic number

  1. #1 Atomic mass and atomic number 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9
    I many times get confused in at. mass and number.

    Is there any simple way to remember at. mass and number for the compounds commonly used?

    Also, what's the difference between the 2?

    Is there any relation also between the 2?



    Thanks


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    792
    atomic number is the number of protons (i.e. the order in which they appear on the periodic table) in the nucleus of an atom.

    atomic mass is protons and neutrons in the nucleus of an atom. However this may be with decimals on the end of it because of the existence of isotopes (i.e. the number of neutrons can be different for atoms of the same element/same atomic number)


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    As a consequence IronMaiden, Atomic Number will always be less than Atomic Mass. Even hydrogen, with an Atomic Number of one, has a slightly larger Atomic Mass - 1.00794 - because of the small number of isotopes of deuterium (one proton and one neutron) and tritium (one proton and two neutrons) that are present in it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,631
    Hmm, what about the electron weight.

    In uranium that should be substantial right? But still they don't name it.

    Also... The mass of the atom, increases more then just the number of parts in the core.. Helium has 4 parts in his core. Hydrogen has only 1. Still the independent weight of 2 protons and 2 neutrons is less then the weight of helium.

    I tried to explain this effect at my report about atomic mass anomalies. I claimed that nucloid parts use energy -> matter translation to create a small portion of matter, to stick the core together. This mass is always there, but you can only measure it when 2 particles are combined together. If i werent dutch i could explain this a little better. But still. I found NO substantial proof.
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9
    I got it.

    But is there some relation like atomic mass is approximately twice the atomic number?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironmaiden
    I got it.

    But is there some relation like atomic mass is approximately twice the atomic number?
    Why don't you plot out the ratios and see what you get?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •