How to Calculate the pH of 0.001 M NaCl?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AdnamaLeigh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ph
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the pH of a 0.001 M NaCl solution, it's important to note that sodium chloride is a strong electrolyte that dissociates completely in water, resulting in a neutral solution. The reaction NaCl + H2O does not produce significant amounts of HCl or NaOH that would alter the pH, which ideally remains at 7. While ionic strength and activity coefficients are relevant in buffer preparation, they do not significantly impact the pH in this scenario. However, it is acknowledged that the addition of neutral salts can influence pH in other contexts. Thus, a NaCl solution at this concentration should maintain a neutral pH of 7.
AdnamaLeigh
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
How do you calculate the pH of 0.001 M NaCl? I was thinking of doing NaCl + H2O ---> HCl + NaOH but I don't know where to go from there if that's even the right step.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sodium Chloride is a strong electrolyte meaning it will disassociate completely in solution.
Strong electrolytes will not affect the pH of the solution as the acids / bases they form are also strong electrolytes.

A NaCl solution of any concentration should have (ideally) a pH of 7.


NaCl (aq) + H2O (l) ---> HCl (aq) + NaOH (aq)
HCl (aq) + NaOH (aq) --> NaCl (aq) + H2O (l)
 
Last edited:
The topic of ionic strength is practical with buffer preparation, however, I don't believe that it's an important factor with regard to the pH in this situation.
 
GCT said:
The topic of ionic strength is practical with buffer preparation, however, I don't believe that it's an important factor with regard to the pH in this situation.

It is an important factor in every solution containing ions. Even if it doesn't change numerical value of pH in this case, you can't assume that addition of neutral salt never changes pH of the solution.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top