Calculating Heat of Fusion and Capacity for Water: 50g Ice to 22°C Liquid Water

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pinkchika88
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fusion Heat Water
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the heat required to convert 50g of ice at 0°C to liquid water at 22°C, the heat of fusion of water (6.01 kJ/mol) and the heat capacity of liquid water (75.3 J/mol*K) are used. The user correctly converted grams of ice to moles, obtaining 2.778 moles. However, the error occurred by not multiplying the heat of fusion by the number of moles, which is necessary for accurate calculations. The correct total heat required is 21.3 kJ, indicating a miscalculation in the user's initial approach.
Pinkchika88
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


the heat of fusion of water is 6.01 kj/mol. the heat capacity of liquid water is 75.3 j/mol*k. the conversion of 50g of ice at 0 degrees C to liquid water at 22 degrees C requires _____kj of heat.

The Attempt at a Solution


i converted grams of ice to mols and got 2.778
then i multiplied by the heat capacity of 75.3 and the change in temperature of 22
i then converted 4601.667j to 4.601kj and added the heat of fusion 6.01kj/mol
i got an answer of 10.611kj but my study guide says the answer should be 21.3kj and I am not sure where in my calculations i went wrong...could someone please help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are close.

Take note that the heat of fusion is given in units of energy per mole i.e. you need to multiply the 6.01 by the number of moles.
 
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