1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kumpel [21]
3 years ago
7

1.505 times 10^23 Na atoms

Chemistry
1 answer:
dybincka [34]3 years ago
8 0

5.75g

Explanation:

Given parameters:

Number of atoms = 1.505 x 10²³atoms

let us find the number of moles and mass of this atom.

Solution:

The mole is convenient unit for reporting measurements in chemistry. It allows us to make mathematical calculations:

     one mole of substance contains 6.02 x 10²³atoms

Number of moles of Na given = \frac{1.505 x 10^{23} }{6.02 x 10^{23} }  = 0.25moles

Mass of Na atom given = number of moles x molar mass

   Molar mass of Na= 23g/mole

Mass of Na = 0.25 x 23 = 5.75g

learn more:

Number of moles brainly.com/question/1841136

#learnwithBrainly

You might be interested in
Please Help!!!
Darya [45]
How many grams of glucose is dissolved in 2.88% glucose solution if 1944 grams of water is used???? The answer is C. 56 grams 
8 0
3 years ago
In a sample of liquid water (H2O), which property differs among the water molecules?
garik1379 [7]

In a sample liquid water, a property that differs among the water molecules is its own orientation and space. The explanation of the answer to the question is because the number of the oxygen and hydrogen atoms and the hydrogen and atoms’ arrangement will never change and will always be the same for each of the water molecule. The strength of the bond of it also does not change and stays the same.

3 0
3 years ago
1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 how many unpaired electrons are in the atom represented by the electron configuration above?
Sedbober [7]
It's a combination of factors:
Less electrons paired in the same orbital
More electrons with parallel spins in separate orbitals
Pertinent valence orbitals NOT close enough in energy for electron pairing to be stabilized enough by large orbital size
DISCLAIMER: Long answer, but it's a complicated issue, so... :)
A lot of people want to say that it's because a "half-filled subshell" increases stability, which is a reason, but not necessarily the only reason. However, for chromium, it's the significant reason.
It's also worth mentioning that these reasons are after-the-fact; chromium doesn't know the reasons we come up with; the reasons just have to be, well, reasonable.
The reasons I can think of are:
Minimization of coulombic repulsion energy
Maximization of exchange energy
Lack of significant reduction of pairing energy overall in comparison to an atom with larger occupied orbitals
COULOMBIC REPULSION ENERGY
Coulombic repulsion energy is the increased energy due to opposite-spin electron pairing, in a context where there are only two electrons of nearly-degenerate energies.
So, for example...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−− is higher in energy than
↑
↓
−−−−−

↓
↑
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
To make it easier on us, we can crudely "measure" the repulsion energy with the symbol
Π
c
. We'd just say that for every electron pair in the same orbital, it adds one
Π
c
unit of destabilization.
When you have something like this with parallel electron spins...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
It becomes important to incorporate the exchange energy.
EXCHANGE ENERGY
Exchange energy is the reduction in energy due to the number of parallel-spin electron pairs in different orbitals.
It's a quantum mechanical argument where the parallel-spin electrons can exchange with each other due to their indistinguishability (you can't tell for sure if it's electron 1 that's in orbital 1, or electron 2 that's in orbital 1, etc), reducing the energy of the configuration.
For example...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−− is lower in energy than
↑
↓
−−−−−

↓
↑
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
To make it easier for us, a crude way to "measure" exchange energy is to say that it's equal to
Π
e
for each pair that can exchange.
So for the first configuration above, it would be stabilized by
Π
e
(
1
↔
2
), but the second configuration would have a
0
Π
e
stabilization (opposite spins; can't exchange).
PAIRING ENERGY
Pairing energy is just the combination of both the repulsion and exchange energy. We call it
Π
, so:
Π
=
Π
c
+
Π
e

Inorganic Chemistry, Miessler et al.
Inorganic Chemistry, Miessler et al.
Basically, the pairing energy is:
higher when repulsion energy is high (i.e. many electrons paired), meaning pairing is unfavorable
lower when exchange energy is high (i.e. many electrons parallel and unpaired), meaning pairing is favorable
So, when it comes to putting it together for chromium... (
4
s
and
3
d
orbitals)
↑
↓
−−−−−
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
compared to
↑
↓
−−−−−
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
is more stable.
For simplicity, if we assume the
4
s
and
3
d
electrons aren't close enough in energy to be considered "nearly-degenerate":
The first configuration has
Π
=
10
Π
e
.
(Exchanges:
1
↔
2
,
1
↔
3
,
1
↔
4
,
1
↔
5
,
2
↔
3
,

2
↔
4
,
2
↔
5
,
3
↔
4
,
3
↔
5
,
4
↔
5
)
The second configuration has
Π
=
Π
c
+
6
Π
e
.
(Exchanges:
1
↔
2
,
1
↔
3
,
1
↔
4
,
2
↔
3
,
2
↔
4
,
3
↔
4
)
Technically, they are about
3.29 eV
apart (Appendix B.9), which means it takes about
3.29 V
to transfer a single electron from the
3
d
up to the
4
s
.
We could also say that since the
3
d
orbitals are lower in energy, transferring one electron to a lower-energy orbital is helpful anyways from a less quantitative perspective.
COMPLICATIONS DUE TO ORBITAL SIZE
Note that for example,
W
has a configuration of
[
X
e
]
5
d
4
6
s
2
, which seems to contradict the reasoning we had for
Cr
, since the pairing occurred in the higher-energy orbital.
But, we should also recognize that
5
d
orbitals are larger than
3
d
orbitals, which means the electron density can be more spread out for
W
than for
Cr
, thus reducing the pairing energy
Π
.
That is,
Π
W
5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
60 kg of fuel was completely burnt for an experiment. The amount of heat energy was found to be 180000KJ. Calculate calorific va
FrozenT [24]

Answer:

3000 kJ/kg

Explanation:

The calorific value of a substance is the amount of heat produced per unit mass by the combustion of the substance.

It is given by:

C=\frac{Q}{m}

where

Q is the amount of heat released

m is the mass of the fuel

In this problem, we have:

m = 60 kg is the mass of fuel

Q=180,000 kJ is the amount of heat released

Therefore, the calorific value of the fuel is:

C=\frac{180,000}{60}=3000 kJ/kg

6 0
3 years ago
The two rate statements below are not the same. Use the concept of unit rates to explain
olganol [36]
It’s definitely B but I’m not sure
8 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which organism can reach 50 meters in size
    13·1 answer
  • Is the following sentence true or false carbon atoms can only form a single bond between other carbon atomd?
    11·1 answer
  • 2.1 The reaction of nitrogendioxide and carbonmonoxide in the gas state to form carbondioxide and nitricoxide is represented by
    9·1 answer
  • Which type of chemical reaction does this equation exemplify?
    5·2 answers
  • In most mirrors, the virtual image appears to come from behind the mirror. True False
    5·1 answer
  • Rick runs 100 feet in 20 seconds what’s his speed?
    6·2 answers
  • Draw the structures of all possible isomers for the following complexes. Indicate which isomers are enantiomer pairs. (a) Bromoc
    9·1 answer
  • What type of muscle controls leg movement?<br><br> A. cardiac<br> B. striated<br> C. smooth
    6·2 answers
  • 10 points<br><br> How many total atoms are in 3(NH4)2S
    12·1 answer
  • Hi! ❤️ , im looking for some help here. ill give brainliest if able to.
    8·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!