Lithium-7 is the most common isotope of lithium.
Answer:
it is possible to remove 99.99% Cu2 by converting it to Cu(s)
Explanation:
So, from the question/problem above we are given the following ionic or REDOX equations of reactions;
Cu2+ + 2e- <--------------------------------------------------------------> Cu (s) Eo= 0.339 V
Sn2+ + 2e- <---------------------------------------------------------------> Sn (s) Eo= -0.141 V
In order to convert 99.99% Cu2 into Cu(s), the equation of reaction given below is needed:
Cu²⁺ + Sn ----------------------------------------------------------------------------> Cu + Sn²⁺.
Therefore, E°[overall] = 0.339 - [-0.141] = 0.48 V.
Therefore, the change in Gibbs' free energy, ΔG° = - nFE°. Where E° = O.48V, n= 2 and F = 96500 C.
Thus, ΔG° = - 92640.
This is less than zero[0]. Therefore, it is possible to remove 99.99% Cu2 by converting it to Cu(s) because the reaction is a spontaneous reaction.
Answer:
B. Ba2+ and Mn (nevermind its not B)
Explanation:
Lipids and <span>They belong in class amphibia or known as amphibians Amphibians they fall into amphibians It is an amphibian in the Anura family amphibian</span>
Hi!
The reason for reviewing and replicating work of other scientists is influenced by two factors listed in the answer:
1. An experiment may have had errors that the scientist did not recognize. <u>(unintentional) </u>
2. The results of individual scientists may be influenced by bias. <u>(intentional)</u>
<em>Personal motivations may often influence a scientist to manipulate the results to best suit his/her hypothesis, consequently leading to scientific fraud. </em>
While other options listed are elements of the scientific method, they are not the reasons behind the review and replication of a scientist's work by others.
