Adding energy for enthelpies of formation by increasing velocity?

AI Thread Summary
Energy is essential for the formation of compounds, with heat and light commonly recognized as catalysts in chemical reactions. The discussion explores whether increasing kinetic energy through velocity can also initiate reactions. It is noted that while kinetic energy can enhance the likelihood of a reaction, the term "catalyst" may not be appropriate, as catalysts specifically lower activation energy without being consumed. An example provided illustrates that colliding reactants at high speeds can generate enough energy to trigger a reaction, such as a thermite reaction between aluminum and rusted iron. Overall, increasing kinetic energy can indeed facilitate chemical reactions under certain conditions.
CaptainZappo
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
I have no idea whether or not this is a ridiculous question, so I am just going to ask it.

My question is based on the concept that energy must be added to ions to get them to form compounds (such as the formation of hydrogen iodide). Typically (or so my chemistry textbook says), the addition of heat energy is the catalyst for these reactions. However, I also recently learned that light energy can also serve the role of catalyst (photochemical reactions). Can kinetic energy also somehow serve as a catalyst?

Basically, can energy added to the system by means of increasing the systems velocity, thereby increasing the systems total kinetic energy, start a reaction?

Feel free to call me an idiot if my question is ridiculous. I'm a physics major, not a chemistry major...haha.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don’t think "catalyst" is really the right word to use for what you are describing.
A catalyst lowers the activation energy of a compound, thereby increasing the rate of reaction without getting used up in the process.
In the case of photosynthesis, the activation energy is provided by the light, and increasing the average kinetic energy of the substance (ie. raising its temperature) will also provide additional activation energy needed for the reaction to proceed.

Increasing the reactants' kinetic energy is a way increase the likelihood of a chemical reaction occurring.
For example...take two metal spheres, one made of Aluminum, the other made of Iron (rusted Iron). Place these two balls together and nothing will happen, the Aluminum and rust do not react. However, if you take these two balls in your arms and then slam them together fast enough you can create a small thermite reaction where the two spheres collide. The energy which went into starting the reaction originally came from the kinetic energies of the spheres before collision which was then turned into heat and allowed the substances to react.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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