(1) MO₂(s) + C(s) → M(s) + CO₂ (g), ΔG₁ = 288.9 kJ/mol
(2) C(s) + O₂(g) → CO₂(g), ΔG₂ = -394.4 kJ/mol
By adding both equations 1 + 2 we get the coupled reaction:
MO₂(s) + 2 C(s) + O₂(g) → M(s) + 2 CO₂(g)
ΔG⁰ = ΔG₁ + ΔG₂
= 288.9 + (-394.4) = -105.5 kJ/mol = -105500 J/mol
Temperature T = 25 + 273.15 = 298.15 K
Molar gas constant R = 8.314 J/mol.K
K =

=
= 3.05 x 10¹⁸
M = n/V
.5M = n/.100 L
n = .1 L * .5M
n= .05 mols of MgCl2
mass of MgCl2 = .05 mols of MgCl2 * 95.211 grams/ 1 mol of MgCl2
mass of MgCl2 = 4.76 grams
4.76 grams of MgCl2 is needed to make 100 ml of a solution that is .500M, in chloride ion. Bolded = confused
Answer:
Metals are lustrous, malleable, ductile, good conductors of heat and electricity. Other properties include: State: Metals are solids at room temperature with the exception of mercury, which is liquid at room temperature (Gallium is liquid on hot days).
Answer:
pH =3.8
Explanation:
Lets call the monoprotic weak acid HA, the dissociation equilibria in water will be:
HA + H₂O ⇄ H₃O⁺ + A⁻ with Ka = [ H₃O⁺] x [A⁻]/ [HA]
The pH is the negative log of the H₃O⁺ concentration, we know the equilibrium constant, Ka and the original acid concentration. So we will need to find the [H₃O⁺] to solve this question.
In order to do that lets set up the ICE table helper which accounts for the species at equilibrium:
HA H₃O⁺ A⁻
Initial, M 0.40 0 0
Change , M -x +x +x
Equilibrium, M 0.40 - x x x
Lets express these concentrations in terms of the equilibrium constant:
Ka = x² / (0.40 - x )
Now the equilibrium constant is so small ( very little dissociation of HA ) that is safe to approximate 0.40 - x to 0.40,
7.3 x 10⁻⁶ = x² / 0.40 ⇒ x = √( 7.3 x 10⁻⁶ x 0.40 ) = 1.71 x 10⁻³
[H₃O⁺] = 1.71 x 10⁻³
Indeed 1.71 x 10⁻³ is small compared to 0.40 (0.4 %). To be a good approximation our value should be less or equal to 5 %.
pH = - log ( 1.71 x 10⁻³ ) = 3.8
Note: when the aprroximation is greater than 5 % we will need to solve the resulting quadratic equation.
Answer:
most likely that (2) the replicated experiment was performed incorrectly.
Why, u ask? u dare question me:
1- The initial experiment invalidness cannot be proven.
2- <em><u>t</u></em><em><u>h</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>o</u></em><em><u>n</u></em><em><u>d</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>a</u></em><em><u>n</u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u>w</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>i</u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>o</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>t</u></em>
3- Different labaratories does not effect the outcome, as long as the parameter and environment of the replicated experiment is the same as when the initial experiment was conducted.
4- Already knowing the data and errors would increase the precision of the replicated experiment.
5- Change in variables should still be in the objective (or purpose) of the experiment, thus, major difference in the outcome should not happen.
happy learning!