Answer:
1.18 moles of CS₂ are produced by the reaction.
Explanation:
We present the reaction:
5C + 2SO₂ → CS₂ + 4CO
5 moles of carbon react to 2 moles of sulfur dioxide in order to produce 1 mol of carbon disulfide and 4 moles of carbon monoxide.
As we do not have data from the SO₂, we assume this as the excess reagent. We convert the mass of carbon to moles:
70.8 g / 12 g/mol = 5.9 moles
Ratio is 5:1, so 5 moles of carbon react to produce 1 mol of CS₂
Then, 5.9 moles will produce (5.9 . 1) / 5 = 1.18 moles
Answer: 0.405g
Explanation:
Molar Mass of Be = 9g/mol
Number of mole of Be = 0.045mol
Mass conc. Of Be = 0.045 x 9 = 0.405g
According to an article dated back in February 8, 1992 which is entitled, “Science: Stardust is made of diamonds” on a website called newscientist (https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13318073-000-science-stardust-is-made-of-diamonds/), American astronomers believed that diamonds are made in supernova explosions. It was said that the diamonds were the foundation of uncommon combinations of isotopes found in some meteorites. Donald Clayton of Clemson University in South Carolina suggested that the weightiest isotopes were more common in meteorites for the reason that the rare gases shaped in the neutron-rich outcome of a supernova explosion. Clayton also said, “the observed mixture of isotopes could have been produced only during the collapse of a massive star to form a neutron star”. This happens in a Type II explosion, for example the Supernova 1987A in the Large Magellanic Cloud. And rare gases like xenon become stuck in both weighty and light isotopes after the ejected gas from such a supernova cools down enough to create dust. The existence of the diamonds with these unusual gases in meteorites infers an alike source. Some of the carbon in the supernova fragments produces ordinary graphite dust, whereas some produces diamond dust. Considerable amount of stardust may be made of diamonds, if Clayton was not mistaken.
Answer:
D. The equipment needed to accommodate the high temperature and pressure will be expensive to produce.
Explanation:
Hello!
In this case, for the considered reaction, it is clear it is an exothermic reaction because it produces energy; and therefore, the higher the temperature the more reactants are yielded as the reverse reaction is favored. Moreover, since the effect of pressure is verified as favoring the side with fewer moles; in this case the products side (2 moles of ammonia).
In such a way, the high pressure favors the formation of ammonia whereas the high temperature the formation of hydrogen and nitrogen and therefore, option A is ruled out. Since the high pressure shifts the reaction rightwards and the high temperature leftwards, we would not be able to know whether the reaction has ended or not because it will be a "go and come back" process, that is why B is also discarded. Now, since hydrogen and nitrogen would be the "wastes", we discard C because they are not toxic. That is why the most accurate answer would be D. because it is actually true that such equipment is quite expensive.
Best regards!
