Assuming we have 100g, this means that
39.97g Carbon * 1 mol / 12 g = 3.33 mol Carbon
13.41g Hydrogen * 1 mol/1 g = 13.41 mol Hydrogen
46.62g Nitrogen * 1 mol / 14 g = 3.33 mol Nitrogen
Dividing everything by 3.33, we get
1 mol Carbon, 4.03 mol Hydrogen, 1 mol Nitrogen.
Empirical formula is CH4N
<span>The mass of the empirical formula is
12 + 4 + 14 = 30
Since the molar mass is double, we multiply all our subscripts
The molecular formula is C2H8N2
The answers to this question are </span><span>an empirical formula of CH4N</span> and a molecular formula of C2H8N2 .
The conversion factor between moles of calcium ion and moles of 
in would be 3 to 1.
<h3>Mole fraction</h3>
if formed from 3 carbon atoms and 3 phosphate atoms according to the equation:
Thus, there are 3 moles of calcium in every 1 mole of .
The conversion factor between moles of calcium and moles of will. therefore, be 3 to 1 or simply 3:1.
More on mole fractions can be found here: brainly.com/question/8076655
#SPJ1
Answer:
C. Butanal , is the aldehyde
Explanation:
A . It is carboxylic acid : ---COOH group
B. It is Ester : ----COOR group , Here R = CH3
C. It is Aldehyde : -----CHO group
D. It is ketone : ----C=O group
See image :
Answer:
a) CaF₂.
b) 7.81g of CaF₂ are present.
Explanation:
a) The calcium ion has as charge Ca²⁺ and fluoride ion is F⁻, that means formula unit is:
CaF₂
b) 1 molecule of CaF₂ contains 2 anions, F⁻. Thus, the moles of CaF₂ is:
1.2x10²³ anions * (1 moleculeCaF₂ / 2 anions) = 6x10²² molecules of CaF₂
6.022x10²³ molecules = 1mol:
6x10²² molecules of CaF₂ * (1mol / 6.022x10²³molecules) = 0.10 moles CaF₂.
1 mole of CaF₂ has a mass of 78.07g:
0.10 moles CaF₂ * (78.07g / mol) =
7.81g of CaF₂ are present
Answer:
Scientific theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions. They describe the causes of a particular natural phenomenon and are used to explain and predict aspects of the physical universe or specific areas of inquiry (for example, electricity, chemistry, and astronomy).
A good theory in the theoretical sense is (1) consistent with empirical observations; is (2) precise, (3) parsimonious, (4) explanatorily broad, and (5) falsifiable; and (6) promotes scientific progress (among others; Table 1.1).
