Answer:
Nothing
Explanation:
Your hypothesis is the whole reason for you experiment right? What i think you should do is retrace everything you did and see if there was an error or you can just do a slight change to the experiment to see if it would make a difference.
Answer:
0.0693M Fe
Explanation:
It is possible to quantify Fe in a sample using Mn as internal standard using response factor formula:
F = A(analyte)×C(std) / A(std)×C(analyte) <em>(1)</em>
Where A is area of analyte and std, and C is concentration.
Replacing with first values:
F = 1.05×2.00mg/mL / 1.00×2.50mg/mL
<em>F = 0.84</em>
In the unknown solution, concentration of Mn is:
13.5mg/mL × (1.00mL/6.00mL) = <em>2.25 mg Mn/mL</em>
Replacing in (1) with absorbances values and F value:
0.84 = 0.185×2.25mg/mL / 0.128×C(analyte)
C(analyte) = <em>3.87 mg Fe / mL</em>
As molarity is moles of solute (Fe) per liter of solution:
= <em>0.0693M Fe</em>
Vibrating around fixed positions
1. False, the water being stored behind the dam has potential energy until it begins to flow through the dam (it is then converted to kinetic energy).
2. True
3. True
Hope this helped! :)
In the absence of neap tide transect data this hypothesis cannot be tested directly, but three pieces of indirect evidence weigh against it as a complete explanation.