Understanding Pure Substances vs. Mixtures for Chemistry Students

  • Thread starter Thread starter Larrytsai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter
AI Thread Summary
Pure substances consist of a single type of element or compound, while mixtures contain two or more substances that are not chemically bonded. For example, brass is a homogeneous mixture of copper and zinc, not a compound, because the metals blend without forming new chemical bonds. In contrast, a pure substance like a chunk of copper is made up entirely of one element. Understanding the difference is crucial for chemistry students, especially when analyzing properties like melting points. This distinction between pure substances and mixtures is essential for correctly interpreting homework problems and real-world examples.
Larrytsai
Messages
222
Reaction score
0
This might be a stupid question... but can anyone tell me the difference between Pure Substances and Mixtures?

I read the definition both in the book but when I look at my hwk problems they don't come to my head what's what. For example A metal that melts not fully at 300 degrees and fully melts at 440 degrees. I thought that it would be Pure substance because a compound is a pure substance. But its actually Homogeneous mixture.

Any help to help me understand the difference is appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well let's take a look at brass, which is a metal. But it is homogenous mixture because it is a mixture of copper Cu and Zinc Zn.
Now if you had a chunk of copper Cu which is also a metal, then you would have a pure substance, ignoring any oxide.
 
MichaelXY said:
Well let's take a look at brass, which is a metal. But it is homogenous mixture because it is a mixture of copper Cu and Zinc Zn.
Now if you had a chunk of copper Cu which is also a metal, then you would have a pure substance, ignoring any oxide.

but isn't CuZn a compound. and a compound is a pure substance?
 
Good question. Brass is not a compound, it is an alloy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy

I was trying to think of a better way to explain this, and the best I can come up with is that the Cu does not bond with the Zn, rather when both elements are melted the Cu atoms and the Zn atoms blend together, sort of like NaCl and H2O.
You don't end up with HCl or NaO, you still have H2O with Na and Cl ions, but if you evaporate the H20 the remaining component is NaCl.
I don't know if I said that well, but I hope it helps.
 
Last edited:
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