Before
I get to the questions, let me make a comment about some of the questions that I
get. It appears that more than half of my mail is from students who want me to
solve a mole problem (or two, or three) that their teacher gave them for
homework. Usually such requests are
accompanied by pleas like: “Please respond immediately” and “Send answer
today, urgent”. Of course it
takes me femtosecond to recog-nize what is happening.
Please, all of you who read this newsletter, pass along the fact that I do not do homework problems for students.
If they want to think it is because I don’t know how, fine.
I can live with that. I
could figure out how many standard 8˝ x 11 sheets of paper it would take to print out a mole of times
the alphabet in lower case Comic Sans MS 11 pt type, single spaced lines, no
spaces between letters, with one inch margins top, bottom, left and right.
(Imagine the variations you could come up with for that one.) If you
enjoy such problems, go for it. I
haven’t figured out the answer, nor do I intend to.
I’d rather watch Jerry Springer with no sound (half the words get
bleeped anyway).
Now to
some of the frequently asked questions (FAQs).
1.
Why is the term “mole” officially abbreviated “mol” and not
something shorter?
I can only offer you my best guess as to why “mole” is officially abbreviated “mol”. Here it is. Most scientific abbreviations (ever wonder why this word is so long?) are 1, 2 or 3 letters long. When possible, we try to use letters that are already in the full length word. The lower case “m” is already used for both mass and molality. Since “mo.” already designates month and “ml (or mL)” is taken to mean milliliters it seemed reasonable to go the three letter designation “mol” which saves us either 1 letter (mole) or 2 letters (moles). Also, capitalization of the “m” in mole doesn’t work on two counts. First, mole is not the name of a person and generally, capital letters are assigned only for units that commemorate a person. (I know, there are violations of that rule.) Second, “M” already is used for molarity units or molar concentration units. You might ask your teacher if she/he knows why the label for liter is “L”. There is an interesting story behind that. If she/he doesn’t know the story, have her/him contact me and I will share it with her/him. Thanks for your question.
2.
What is the origin of the chemical term “mole”? Was it originated by
Avogadro?
First of all, Avogadro did not use the term “mole”. Not only that, he did not come up with Avogadro’s Number. But his work did pave the way for the unit we call “mole”. The term was probably first used by Wilhelm Ostwald around 1900. The word is possibly derived from the latin “molus” which means “little pile”. Another source indicates the term “mole” may come from the German “molekulargewicht”. Some have even suggested that it is the fractionation of the word “molecule”. All of this is fancy talk for “I really don’t know for sure.”
3.
You call yourselves the National Mole Day Foundation.
What, exactly, is a “mole”?
A scientific mole is really a number. You know that when somebody refers to a dozen cookies, that they mean twelve cookies. A “dozen” means “twelve”. In science, we use the term “mole” to represent “6.02 times 10 to the 23rd power,” which is a very large number. It is often written at “6.02 x 1023” or “6.02 x 10^23” or “6.02 E 23”. We use this number to count very small things like atoms and molecules. A mole of water is 18 milliliters or about 9/14 of an ounce of water. That is not very much when we look at it but it is a very large number of molecules of water. It represents an amount of material that is large enough to see and usually small enough to hold. I hope this helps.
4. I’ve seen the numerical part of Avogadro’s number written as 6.02 or sometimes 6.022. Since it represents a number of atoms or molecules, and assuming that it is a whole number with fractional remainder, what are the rest of the numbers (to the decimal point)? Mathematicians give us p to more than a million decimal places. Why don’t we know Avogadro’s number at least to the real decimal point?
Most of our values in science are measured and therefore subject to the limitations of measure-ment. For example, if you were measuring the distance across a room, you would be doing well to measure accurately to the nearest millimeter. That may be the best you could do. You couldn’t measure to the nearest nanometer with the tools you are likely to have access to. The only values we have in science that are “exact” are defined values (like 1 meter is equal to 100 centimeters) and counting numbers (if you count carefully and accurately). For example, if you count out 5 apples, you have exactly five apples and not a fraction over or under. But if you measure a distance, you may get 2.431 meters but you don’t know what the next decimal place is. There is always a limit to your measurements. I hope this helps.
5.
How is a mole represented?
If you mean the chemical mole, I am sure you can find representations of the amount that is a mole in your Chemistry text book. If you want a representation of the National Mole Day Foundation mascot, Burrow D. Mole, I suspect it can be found either in the newsletter or on our web site. If you are looking for a representation of me, Monty Mole, I’m afraid you are out of luck. I am so devastatingly handsome that I am required by law to prevent my image from appearing in print for fear of mass rioting.
6.
Why is the symbol “n” used for moles in equations such as PV = nRT?
Most likely, the symbol “n” stands for “number of moles”.
Ask Monty Mole
1. From Regis Fullbin, NYC,
NY,
It seems that everyone is watching
“Who Wants To Be a Millionaire” lately and many people are trying very hard
to get on the show and there have even been celebrities on the program.
Have you ever considered trying out for the show.
I hope you will. You know
everything. I am trying to get on
the show myself and I was thinking wouldn’t it be neat if you and I were
challengers on the same show. I
sure hope it happens even if it means that you would be faster on the “fast
finger” qualifying questions, which I know you are, and that’s okay because
you are the best.
Thank you, Regis, for your vote of confidence. You’re right. I do know everything. For example, I know that you, Regis, are not the same Regis who is the emcee of the show. In fact, I am told that you are a few lumps of coal shy of a full bin. When you were in school, did anyone ever talk about run-on sentences?
I did try to call the real Regis (Philbin) a couple of weeks ago.
I explained that I would be interested in being on the next celebrity
show and that I didn’t want to go through the hassle of qualifying since I was
probably smarter than anyone else he had ever had on the show.
I never really understood his response to that statement.
He seemed to be mumbling something about wishing he had a nickel for
every time he heard that. I told
him I would be happy to send him a nickel but he never gave me an address. After this, things seemed to deteriorate.
I don’t understand why. Perhaps
he was just uncomfortable talking to someone who was not of his species who was
clearly his intellectual superior. I
tried to win back his favor by talking about MENSA.
I was sure he was a member and I thought he might enjoy talking to the
first and only mole to be made a member. (Of
course, I am sure many other moles could be members but moles tend not to be
joiners and no others have ever applied.) This
apparently was a mistake because he didn’t seem to know anything about the
inner workings of MENSA. Then he
told me that he didn’t know that I was a mole.
He wanted to know if I was working for the Russians or the Australians.
I told him that I wasn’t that kind of mole.
Then he made some wisecrack about “maybe I was the dirt-pushing,
lawn-destroying, worm-grubbing burrowing bane of humankind”. Obviously he was
unaware of the ecological niche occupied by moles in general and he must have
been oblivious to my humble though incredible talents.
This guy was clearly a 40 watt bulb living in a spotlight world. At this point I politely ended the conversation indicating
that I was no longer interested in appearing on his program. Now I am thinking that maybe I will give Alex Trebeck or Pat
Sajak a call.
2. From Carrie McKellski of
Reading, OR: “You
seem to be so knowledgeable about so may things. How do you keep up on the latest science news?
Tell me about something interesting in your latest readings.”
To be honest, Carrie, I have an entire staff of moles who read virtually every newspaper and scientific journal for me and present me with summaries of the more important items and clippings of the most important issues. I keep busy enough just reading the selected material and summaries but it does keep me informed. For example, in a recent issue of Psychology Whenever there was a most interesting article about recent attempts to measure the IQ of dust mites. It involved observing the behavior of these creatures as they pass through the business end of a vacuum cleaner and creating minute tears in the bag that collects the dirt (and dust mites). This proved to be fruitless for reasons I will divulge in a moment. Next, the five researchers collected 360 dust mites and divided them into six groups of 60. They assumed that each of the groups was large enough that if dust mites in community have a range of IQs, a group of 60 would represent a reasonable cross section. They then marked various symbols on the heads of straight pins (I kid you not) to see what symbols they were attracted to. It turns out that five of the groups congregated around the pin with a lower case Greek letter delta on it while the sixth group was attracted to the symbol of the artist formerly known as Prince. The researchers could not figure out what this meant. I know what it meant. It meant that the dust mites had higher IQs than the researchers. The basic message was: “You guys would be better off remaining nameless. We give you five grades of “d” (lower case because your research effort was so pitiful).” Obviously, dust mites are a great deal smarter than people give them credit for.
3.
An e-mail from Gus Restelott of Greasepit, OK:
“What can we do about the high
cost of gasoline?”
There is an old saying; “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” In the mid 1970’s we faced a fuel crisis caused by an oil embargo. At the end of the Ford and the beginning of the Carter presidencies it became pretty clear how vulnerable we were and that we needed to get serious about becoming less reliant on foreign oil, institute strong conservation measures, and identify and mass produce alternative fuels. That tune lasted about as long as any song stays at the top of the hit parade. And guess what? Deja vu all over again! But back to your question. What can we do about the high cost of gasoline? To answer that, let me go back about 25 years. We can “. . . get serious about becoming less reliant on foreign oil, institute strong conservation measures, and identify and mass produce alternative fuels”. Until that happens you can 1) drive less and walk more, 2) get a second job or 3) take out a second mortgage on you home. The big question, Gus, is will we learn anything this time around so we won’t have another repeat. By the way, it is only you humans who need gasoline and other petroleum-based products. We moles never did need them.
4. From Richard Drachman of the Goddard Space Flight Center: I'm afraid your reply to the questioner who wanted to know "the number" to more significant figures (although probably tongue-in-cheek) might cause some confusion. It's important for students to know the difference between mathematics, where things can be known "exactly", and experimental sciences, like chemistry and physics, where measurement generates the fundamental constants. Avogadro's number is easy to define but not so easy to evaluate. It is just not known that accurately! I'm sorry.Richard, one does not have to invoke Heisenberg when observing that tongue-in-cheek is the modus operandi of Monty Mole. Look at the ten items explaining how to best an overzealous math person in the same response. I know that most high school chemistry (and I presume physics) teachers begin their course by discussing uncertainty of measurement, significant figures and the fact that most values that we work with are the result of measurement rather than definition. In experimental science, there are few "exact" values and that "exact" values are the result of definition not measurement. Sources tell me, Richard, that you are a stand-up kind of guy and that if I closely monitor sensory readouts, I will find that something other than gravitational force is being applied to one of my lower extremities.
5. From Marie Kopesky of North Pocono High School: ...I'm happy to report that other teachers at North Pocono High School are going to join me in my celebration (of Mole Day). Unfortunately, I cannot get the other chem teacher to participate. He has an attitude problem. His students see my excited students leaving the classroom singing mole songs. They asked him to celebrate, but he told them -"it is beneath us". Well, this year the activities are going to be bigger and greater than before. I hope he changes his mind. Do you have any suggestions for this teacher of AP chemistry and chemistry II? I would like his support.
Marie, my condolences. I think I know part of the problem. I've seen it before. This colleagues very probably tone deaf and terrified of leading the singing of any song. But there may be help. Get him a copy of "7 Kinds of Smart" by Thomas Armstrong which is a practical description and application of Howard Gardner's work. Then, provide him with a couple of Mike Offutt tapes and Tom Lehrer CDs. Musical intelligence is present in everyone to some degree, and he has some students where it is highly developed. Occasional musical stimulation (and humor) will benefit them. Mole Day celebrations appeal particularly to Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence, Musical intelligence, and Interpersonal intelligence. These are most often omitted from the traditional classroom. This teacher might be surprised to learn that many teachers notice that their students do better after an occasional "time-out" from the usual routine. Also, enlist the help of the school's music teacher. Perhaps this teacher could offer to combine the music and AP chem or chem II classes for a day to learn and sing Mole day songs.
You can write to Monty at: Ask Monty Mole, c/o Jim Waner, 102 Griffes St., Clio, MI, 48420 or you can send e-mail to jwaner8@comcast.net Praise, money, frivolous questions and testimonials are accepted. "New year, new motto" is this year's motto.
Praise, money, frivolous questions and testimonials are accepted. This year's motto is "Everything I know, I owe to osmosis."
Back to the main page