When Do Kc and Kp Equal Each Other?

AI Thread Summary
Kc and Kp are equal under specific conditions related to the gaseous reactants and products in a reaction. They will equal each other when the total number of moles of gaseous reactants equals that of the products, or when the number of moles of gaseous products is equal to the number of gaseous reactants. The equilibrium constant remains unchanged with the addition of reactants or products, as it is only affected by temperature. The relationship Kp = Kc(RT)^{delta n} is crucial in determining when Kc and Kp are equal. Understanding these principles clarifies the conditions under which Kc and Kp can be considered equivalent.
ada0713
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
The two equilibrium constants for the same reaction Kc and Kp will always equal one another when:

1) all of the reactant and products are gases
2) In the reaction equation, the number of moles of gaseous product is smaller than the number of moles of gaseous reactants.
3) In the reaction equation, the number of moles of gaseous product is greater than the number of moles of gaseous reactants.
4) In the reaction equation, to total number of moles of reactants equal that of the products
5) in the reaction equation, the number of moles of gaseous products equals the number of gaseous reactants.

==============================
above is the question..
I thought that the equilibrium constant changes only when temperature is added
to the system. No matter how much products or reactant you add to the system
the equilibrium constant will stay the same (the actual concentration changes,
adjusting to have same equilibrium constant as before)

None of the answer choices looks correct. I' pretty sure that #1 is wrong, but
other stuff I'm all confused. Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can anyone help me with this?
 
never mind I think i have the answer
 
Did it involve finding when this equality must be true? Kp = Kc(RT)^{delta n}
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top