Calculating Concentrations in a Buffer Solution

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the concentrations of ethanoic acid and ethanoate ions in a buffer solution made from 50 mL of 0.05M ethanoic acid and 50 mL of 0.05M sodium ethanoate, simple dilution must be considered. When the two solutions are mixed, the final volume becomes 100 mL, which affects the concentrations. The initial concentrations of both components are halved due to the dilution, resulting in 0.025M for both ethanoic acid and ethanoate ions. The Henderson-Hasselbalch equation is not necessary for this calculation, as the focus should be on the dilution effect. Understanding the dilution principle is key to accurately determining the final concentrations in the buffer solution.
adhlpi
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement [/b]
A buffer solution was made using 50mL of 0.05M of ethanoic acid and 50mL 0.05 of sodium ethanoate. The question asks what is the concentration of ethanoic acid and ethanoate ions in the buffer solution. I assumed it would be 0.05M but when I asked for help I was told to work out the ethanaote ions by using Henderson-Hasselbalch equation first then work out the acid concentration. The pKa value of ethanoic acid is 4.76. I guess its something to do with the fact pH=pKa maybe, then find out the [H+]? so 10*-4.76 as my concentration
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No need for HH equation here, but once you mix 50 mL with 50 mL final concentrations are not 0.05M. Think simple dilution.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top