Why was Carbon-12 chosen as the standard for AMU units?

The answer is an accident of history.

Initially, the easiest measurement available was to determine the relative molecular masses of
substances which are gases at room temperature. This is because of Avogadro's Principle, which
states that "pressure and temperature being equal, an amount of any gas which occupies a given
volume will have the same number of molecules." That is, a gallon of hydrogen and a gallon of
oxygen will have the same number of molecules, pressure and temperature being equal. This
allows one to establish, for example, that oxygen masses sixteen times as much as hydrogen.
Since oxygen forms compounds with more elements than practically any other, oxygen was a
natural standard for an atomic mass scale. Then, chemical analysis would allow one to determine
the atomic mass of any other element which formed a compound with oxygen. And since
hydrogen, the lightest element, weighed 1/16 as much as oxygen, the mass of oxygen was
defined as exactly 16.
In the early 20th Century, while chemists were still determining atomic masses as they always
had, by chemical analysis, physicists seized on the technique of mass spectrometry, by which one
could measure the mass of a single atom or molecule. And therein lay the problem.
In a chemical analysis, one is never determining the mass of an isolated atom or molecule,
always the average mass of a huge ensemble of atoms or molecules. (My basic principle:
"Chemistry never happens to isolated atoms or molecules. Only physics happens to isolated
atoms or molecules.") Therefore, chemists assigned natural oxygen -- which is a mixture of 16O,
17
O and 18O -- a mass of exactly 16.
On the other hand, physicists, who were actually measuring the masses of individual atoms or
molecules, found it much simpler to assign a mass of exactly 16 to 16O itself. This led to
discrepencies (in the third or fourth significant figure, which can be important), and eventually
the conflict was resolved by adopting a compromise in 1961: 12C would be assigned a mass of
exactly 12. This placed the new scale approximately midway between the two old, oxygen-based
scales.

Why is the definition of the mole as it is?

up vote
11 down
vote
favorite

I have asked my teacher, as she was introducing the concept of mole to us, why that
number was chosen, instead of more convenient one. She told me that it came from
the definition of the mole, that is the number of atoms in 12g of Carbon 12. When I
asked why that definition was chosen, she answered me that my question wasn't
really a question, and I understood from her stare that asking why? twice in a row

was not appreciated.

However, I certainly hope that this definition wasn't chosen randomly and that there
is a reason for it being it.
I gave it some thought and I came to believe that it may be for convenience after all.
There are 12 nucleons in a carbon atom and if we say that the electrons mass can be
neglected, then we get that a mole is the number of nucleon it takes to get one gram
of them. However, can we really neglect the mass of electrons, when the atoms get
bigger? And if so, why do the element's mass per mole do very rarely end up being
integers?
This makes me think there may be another reason, or some things I do not
understand. And if there are no reason, then I guess I might just as well be doing
religious studies..!
mole
asked May 29 '14 at
17:42

shareimprove this
question

edited May 29 '14 at

18:39

Oliver
1626

+1 for asking your teacher like a child, something I think all curious
and exploring minds should do! Never accept "because I say so" as
an answer ;) Wilhelmsen May 30 '14 at 11:12
Go easy on your teacher though - sometimes it's hard to tell if a
student is smart, or just "being smart" :) thomij May 30 '14 at 20:37

add a comment
2 Answers
active oldest votes
up vote 15 Why is the definition of the moles as it is?
down vote

It is a rather arbitary definition that the mole is the number of atoms in 12g of

carbon 12. This has not always been the definition. For example, prior to 1960, the
definition was based upon oxygen rather than carbon-12.
The first standard was based upon 1 gram of hydrogen. Later, the standard was
changed to 16 grams of oxygen being a mole, for convenience because oxygen
formed compounds with many other elements. Eventually it was realized that
elements including oxygen have different isotopes of different mass, and the mass
of a particular isotope is a more specific and measurable standard than the mass of
natural abundance oxygen. 12 grams of carbon-12 matches the old standard of 16
grams of natural abundance oxygen more closely than choosing 16 grams of
oxygen 16.
can we really neglect the mass of electrons, when the atoms get bigger?
The mass of a proton or neutron is about 1836 times that of an electron. So
depending upon the ratio of neutrons to protons, electrons are at most 1/1836 of the
mass of a neutral atom. If accuracy of more than 1 part in 1836 is desired, it is
important to consider the electrons, regardless of whether atoms are big or small.
why do the element's mass per mole do very rarely end up being integers?
accepted

No element other than carbon-12 will exactly be an interger. This is because masses
of atoms depend upon number of protons, neutrons, electrons and binding energy.
In other words, considering that carbon-12 has an equal number of protons and
neutrons (and electrons), other isotopes with a 1:1 proton/neutron ratio would have
essentially integral atomic masses except for binding energy. For example cadmium
112 is 111.90 instead of exactly 112 because binding energy is slightly more than
0.1 amu, partially offest by a higher number of neutrons than protons, the neutron
mass being slightly greater than the combined mass of an electron and proton.
As pointed out by Matt Black, the natural abundance atomic masses further deviate
because they are weighted averages of the masses of isotopes of a given element,
weighted by their abundance on Earth.
shareimprove this
answer

edited May 30 '14 at

12:21

answered May 29 '14 at

18:12

DavePhD
12.3k640

That's a good answer - I would also add that all standards are chosen
for two reasons: consistency and convenience, and C-12 meets both
requirements better than any other element. thomij May 29 '14 at
18:21

@thomij If you wanted to expand on that a little, it would be a great

second answer. jonsca May 29 '14 at 19:23
+1 nice answer however I think hydrogen is not related to the
concept of mole... G M May 29 '14 at 22:40

The major reason why elements masses are not integers or even
close to them is that most quoted numbers in periodic tables are
based on a mixture of isotopes. The errors from binding energy etc.
are usually much smaller (parts per thousand so affecting the 2nd or
3rd decimal place). matt_black May 29 '14 at 23:14
@matt_black that is right however

H1 =1.007 825 032 07(10) and

hydrogen standard atomic weight is 1.008(1) G M May 30 '14 at

8:40
show 2 more comments
up vote 5
down vote

Why is the definition of the moles as it is?

Here what say The International System of Units (SI)
Atomic weights were originally referred to the atomic weight of oxygen, by
general agreement taken as 16. But whereas physicists separated the isotopes in a
mass spectrometer and attributed the value 16 to one of the isotopes of oxygen,
chemists attributed the same value to the (slightly variable) mixture of isotopes 16,
17 and 18, which was for them the naturally occurring element oxygen. Finally an
agreement between the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP)
and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) brought this
duality to an end in 1959/60. Physicists and chemists have ever since agreed to
assign the value 12, exactly, to the so-called atomic weight of the isotope of carbon
with mass number 12 (carbon 12, 12C), correctly called the relative atomic mass
Ar( 12C). The unified scale thus obtained gives the relative atomic and molecular

masses, also known as the atomic and molecular weights, respectively

Atomic Weight' - The Name, Its History, Definition, And Units Prepared For
Publication By P. De Bievre' And H. S. Peiser
The unit could be fixed arbitrarily. By choice, it was linked to 12C and the
macroscopic mass unit, the kilogram of the SI. Nevertheless, one should note from
the definition below that the magnitude of that link factor of NA does not affect the
amount of substance of any entity.

Why do the element's mass per mole do very

rarely end up being integers?
This is due to the "mass defect" that is related to the fact that:

E=mc2
So the mass is linked to the energy, different elements have different
energy due to different Nuclear binding ENERGY and so different mass!