- #1
mikkol
- 4
- 0
Hello,
my tutor told me the answer to this questions went beyond the scope of the course.
We are taught that according to Le Chatelier principle, a system at equilibrium compensates a changement of pressure by shifting towards products or reactants and thus changing the number of molecules in the system. So, a pressure's increase is compensated by a reduction of the number of molecules in the system, shifting the equilibrium towards more massive molecules. A reduced number of more massive molecules should exert on the container's walls the same overall pressure than a larger number of less massive molecules, so nullifying the system's shift. So why is that not the case?
Besides, we are also taught that pressure exerted by gases on a container's wall depends on the number of molecules hitting the walls. The Pascal, pressure's SI unit, is defined as N x m-2 , so kg m-1 s-2. Therefore, pressure should also depend on the mass of the molecules colliding with the container's walls?
Best wishes
Nick
my tutor told me the answer to this questions went beyond the scope of the course.
We are taught that according to Le Chatelier principle, a system at equilibrium compensates a changement of pressure by shifting towards products or reactants and thus changing the number of molecules in the system. So, a pressure's increase is compensated by a reduction of the number of molecules in the system, shifting the equilibrium towards more massive molecules. A reduced number of more massive molecules should exert on the container's walls the same overall pressure than a larger number of less massive molecules, so nullifying the system's shift. So why is that not the case?
Besides, we are also taught that pressure exerted by gases on a container's wall depends on the number of molecules hitting the walls. The Pascal, pressure's SI unit, is defined as N x m-2 , so kg m-1 s-2. Therefore, pressure should also depend on the mass of the molecules colliding with the container's walls?
Best wishes
Nick