The answer is yes. A chemical change occurred.
Chemical change is defined as the rearrangement or alteration in the of atoms in one or more substance which result in the formation of a new substance.
In the above, you mixed two clear liquids and the result was a new substance which is a colored solid precipitate at the bottom of the beaker.
This means that changes in the atoms of the two clear liquids occurred leading to the formation of this new solid substance.
This means that chemical change has occurred.
Hope this helps :)
Answer:The process of science is iterative.
Science circles back on itself so that useful ideas are built upon and used to learn even more about the natural world. This often means that successive investigations of a topic lead back to the same question, but at deeper and deeper levels. Let's begin with the basic question of how biological inheritance works. In the mid-1800s, Gregor Mendel showed that inheritance is particulate — that information is passed along in discrete packets that cannot be diluted. In the early 1900s, Walter Sutton and Theodor Boveri (among others) helped show that those particles of inheritance, today known as genes, were located on chromosomes. Experiments by Frederick Griffith, Oswald Avery, and many others soon elaborated on this understanding by showing that it was the DNA in chromosomes which carries genetic information. And then in 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick, again aided by the work of many others, provided an even more detailed understanding of inheritance by outlining the molecular structure of DNA. Still later in the 1960s, Marshall Nirenberg, Heinrich Matthaei, and others built upon this work to unravel the molecular code that allows DNA to encode proteins. And it doesn't stop there. Biologists have continued to deepen and extend our understanding of genes, how they are controlled, how patterns of control themselves are inherited, and how they produce the physical traits that pass from generation to generation. The process of science is not predetermined.
Any point in the process leads to many possible next steps, and where that next step leads could be a surprise. For example, instead of leading to a conclusion about tectonic movement, testing an idea about plate tectonics could lead to an observation of an unexpected rock layer. And that rock layer could trigger an interest in marine extinctions, which could spark a question about the dinosaur extinction — which might take the investigator off in an entirely new direction. At first this process might seem overwhelming. Even within the scope of a single investigation, science may involve many different people engaged in all sorts of different activities in different orders and at different points in time — it is simply much more dynamic, flexible, unpredictable, and rich than many textbooks represent it as. But don't panic! The scientific process may be complex, but the details are less important than the big picture …
It is false. The salt bridge is not a path for electrons, but a path for ions to flow from one half-cell to another. It help to balance the charge between the oxidation and reduction vessels.
Here we have to get the 
of the reaction at 520 K temperature.
The of the reaction is 1.705 atm
We know the relation between and 
is 
, where = The equilibrium constant of the reaction in terms of partial pressure, = The equilibrium constant of the reaction in terms of concentration and N = number of moles of gaseous products - Number of moles of gaseous reactants.
Now in this reaction, PCl₃ + Cl₂ ⇄ PCl₅
Thus number of moles of gaseous product is 1, and number of moles of gaseous reactants are 2. Thus N = |1 - 2| = 1 mole
The given value of is 4.0×10⁻²
The molar gas constant, R = 0.082 L. Atm. mol⁻¹. K⁻¹ and temperature, T = 520 K.
On plugging the values in the equation we get,
Or, = 1.705 atm
Thus, the of the reaction is 1.705 atm
