All categories

2 years ago

Thermal energy added to a substance that is not changing state causes the substance’s temperature to

Chemistry

1 answer:

tatyana61 [14]2 years ago

6 0

Answer:

increase

Explanation:

Conduction involves the transfer of electric charge or thermal energy due to the movement of particles. When the conduction relates to electric charge, it is known as electrical conduction while when it relates to thermal energy, it is known as heat conduction. Conductors include metal, steel, aluminum, copper, frying pan, pot, spoon etc.

In the process of heat conduction, thermal energy is usually transferred from fast moving particles to slow moving particles during the collision of these particles. Also, thermal energy is typically transferred between objects that has different degrees of temperature and materials (particles) that are directly in contact with each other but differ in their ability to accept or give up electrons.

Hence, thermal energy added to a substance that is not changing state causes the substance’s temperature to increase because it would absorb energy in the form of heat.

You might be interested in

Which direction does the sun to move across the sky

Ierofanga [76]

Answer:

EAST is the answer

Explanation:

For the moment, let us just think about one motion - - Earth's spin (or rotation) on its axis. Earth rotates or spins toward the east, and that's why the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars all rise in the east and make their way westward across the sky.

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

The substance oxidized causes the other substance to be reduced and is called the:.

blsea [12.9K]

Answer:hydrogen Peroxide

Explanation:

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What does unsaturated zone mean?

Nadya [2.5K]

The unsaturated zone is the portion of the subsurface above the groundwater table. The soil and rock in this zone contains air as well as water in its pores. ... Unlike the aquifers of the saturated zone below, the unsaturated zone is not a source of readily available water for human consumption

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

En un recipiente colocamos unos cubos de hielo luego tapamos y observamos que sucede despues de un tiempo

SSSSS [86.1K]

Three questions come along with the given statement. It is in Spanish language:

a) Por qué se humedeció la parte exterior del frasco?

b) Por qué el hielo disminuyó su volumen y ahora es agua?

c) Por qué puede haber agua en el exterior?

These are the three answers (in English).

First question:

a) Por qué se humedeció la parte exterior del frasco?

The question is Why did the outside of the bottle get wet?

Answer:

The outside of the bottle get wet because the ice cubes cooled the walls of the bottle, so the air surrounding the bottle also cooled.

The air contains humidity (water) in gas phase. The hotter the air the more the amount of humidity it can retain, the cooler the air the less the amount of humidity it can retain.

Then, when the air close to the walls of the bootle got cooler some of the water in the air became liquid and those are the drops of water that you see in the outside of the bottle.

Second question

b) Por qué el hielo disminuyó su volumen y ahora es agua?

The question is Why did the ice diminish its volume and now it is water?

Answer:

The ice diminished its volume and now it is water, becasue the ice, which is cooler than the surroundings, received heat energy (from the surroundings) and then its temperature increased. At some moment, this temperature reached the melting point of the ice (water) and it started to become liquid.

Third question

c) Por qué puede haber agua en el exterior?

The question is: Why can there be water outside?

Answer:

The water outside is outside since the beginning: it is in the air. You do not see it because it is gas state. When the air close to the walss of the bottle got cooler, part of the water in the air became liquid.

4 0

3 years ago

How can you determine which bond in a structure is more polar without using an electronegativity table?

UkoKoshka [18]

To know this you pretty much do have to kind of memorize a few electronegativities. I don't recall ever getting a table of electronegativities on an exam.
From the structure, you have:

I remember the following electronegativities most because they are fairly patterned:
EN
H
=
2.1
EN
C
=
2.5
EN
N
=
3.0
EN
O
=
3.5
EN
F
=
4.0
EN
Cl
=
3.5
Notice how carbon through fluorine go in increments of
~
0.5
. I believe Pauling made it that way when he determined electronegativities in the '30s.
Δ
EN
C
−
Cl
=
1.0
Δ
EN
C
−
H
=
0.4
Δ
EN
C
−
C
=
0.0
Δ
EN
C
−
O
=
1.0
Δ
EN
O
−
H
=
1.4
So naturally, with the greatest electronegativity difference of
4.0
−
2.5
=
1.5
, the
C
−
F
bond is most polar, i.e. that bond's electron distribution is the most drawn towards the more electronegative compound as compared to the rest.
When the electron distribution is polarized and drawn towards a more electronegative atom, the less electronegative atom has to move inwards because its nucleus was previously favorably attracted to the electrons from the other atom.
That means generally, the greater the electronegativity difference between two atoms is, the shorter you can expect the bond to be, insofar as the electronegative atom is the same size as another comparable electronegative atom.
However, examining actual data, we would see that on average, in conditions without other bond polarizations occuring:
r
C
−
Cl
≈
177 pm
r
C
−
C
≈
154 pm
r
C
−
O
≈
143 pm
r
C
−
F
≈
135 pm
r
C
−
H
≈
109 pm
r
O
−
H
≈
96 pm
So it is not necessarily the least electronegativity difference that gives the longest bond.
Therefore, you cannot simply consider electronegativity. Examining the radii of the atoms, you should notice that chlorine is the biggest atom in the compound.
r
Cl
≈
79 pm
r
C
≈
70 pm
r
H
≈
53 pm
r
O
≈
60 pm
So assuming the answer is truly
C
−
C
, what would have to hold true is that:
The
C
−
F
bond polarization makes the carbon more electropositive (which is true).
The now more electropositive carbon wishes to attract bonding pairs from chlorine closer, thereby shortening the
C
−
Cl
bond, and potentially the
C
−
H
bond (which is probably true).
The shortening of the
C
−
Cl
bond is somehow enough to be shorter than the
C
−
C
bond (this is debatable).

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers