Okay, so for accounting unit in chemistry, why does lumber? Bo is much more advantage. Much more better offered just in the mass units for us. For sample. We have number most worse. That's Ah, Graham, Something like that. Okay, so in chemistry, we have most of time. We have something we action studying reaction. We are looking at their stocky, almost real baby in Amman. Off reaction. Amal party pimp rodeos for Houston. We have, ah reaction between hydrogen and also jury, and they will form water. So let me bounce a chemical reaction first, make sure everything's right. Okay, so we have this reaction we can use number most. Or you can use mass to do accounting unit that the number one most will be much more battered and using mass. Because then, boom Mose essentially tell you about the lumber upmarket again, your chemistry. We're looking at reaction from this chemical reaction. We know that when we have 200 remark you we have with one oxygen molecule and anyone produce to water molecules so you can see that the way show they were looking at the lumber or more Q. We acting the shoulder Well, we have two more here yet with one more cuter for another to mark you. But if you mass, we are looking at the total mass and we go for different, more cure different at different element the head of a mass. So we cannot give in, um, represent actual number market reacting directly by using mass. That's why we prefer introducing limbo most to show the actual number mark, you're reacting, and then we can
In principle, we could use the more familiar unit dozen in place of mole when expressing the quantities of particles (atoms, ions, or molecules). What would be the disadvantage in doing so?
In principle we could use the more familiar unit dozen in place of mole when expressing the quantities of particles (atoms, ions, or molecules) in chemical reactions. What would be the disadvantage in doing so?