Calculate concentration of halfcell

  • Thread starter Thread starter m0286
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Concentration
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the concentration of Cd2+ in a voltaic cell using the Nernst equation, given the initial cell potential and the concentration of Mn2+. The user sought guidance on how to approach the problem, providing specific half-reaction equations and standard electrode potentials. After some interaction, the user confirmed they solved the problem independently. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding electrochemical principles and applying the Nernst equation for concentration calculations. The thread concludes with the user expressing gratitude for the assistance received.
m0286
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Hello
Im completely stuck on this question and don't know where to begin or what to do.. and help or guidance is appreciated:

A voltaic cell at 25oC consists of Mn/Mn2+ and Cd/Cd2+ half-cells with an initial cell potential of +0.768 V. The [Mn2+] concentration is 0.500 M. Use the Nernst equation to calculate the [Cd2+] concentration in the Cd/Cd2+ half-cell.
Cd+2(aq) + 2e- = Cd(s) . . . . . Eo = -0.40 V

Mn+2(aq) + 2e- = Mn(s) . . . . . Eo = -1.18 V

a. 0.010 M
b. 0.050 M
c. 0.20 M
d. 0.5
e. 0.25
its an online assignment and its due at 6am so any help soon is appreciated THANKS
 
Physics news on Phys.org
got it!

thnx for lookin but we figured it out :)
 
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