moles

There doesn't seem to be any term ready to hand for what is meant, because the term "mole" requires some tacit understanding of what the parts being counted are. "Mole" uniquely quantizes a count noun without attaching some dimension.

At the time of writing, "elementary entities" in the first paragraph links to the [[elementary particles|the article on elementary particles]], which discusses fundamental particles in physics and excludes, e.g. atoms. This is clearly not what is meant, as atoms are one the examples of 'elementary entities'. There doesn't seem to be a term ready to hand for what ''is'' meant. That is its role in the language.

At the time of writing, "elementary entities" in the first paragraph links to the [[elementary particles|the article on elementary particles]], which discusses fundamental particles in physics and excludes, e.g. atoms. This is clearly not what is meant, as atoms are one the examples of 'elementary entities'. There doesn't seem to be a term ready to hand for what ''is'' meant. The article on Avogadro's number suggests "constituent particles". Unfortunately this has a technical denotation in thermodynamics.

I also think that the article should mention how the mole brings quantitative properties of substances up to the macroscopic level, which I think is part of the rationale.

hmm intriguing. unlocking and the categorical imperative

At the time of writing, "elementary entities" in the first paragraph links to the [[elementary particles|the article on elementary particles]], which discusses fundamental particles in physics and excludes e.g. atoms. This is clearly not what is meant, as atoms are one the examples of 'elementary entities'. There doesn't seem to be a term ready to hand for what ''is'' meant.

"Mole", uniquely as far as I can see, treats a mass noun as being 'already' quantized, giving it a dimensionless quantity. That is its role. Unlike with Avogadro's number, it permits the elimination of the

I also think that the article should mention how the mole brings quantitative properties of substances up to the macroscopic level, which I think is part of its rationale.