Calculating Natural Abundance of Lithium Isotopes

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mootiek
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Variables
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the natural abundance of lithium isotopes, the average atomic mass of lithium (6.941 amu) is set equal to the weighted sum of the isotopes' masses. The equation involves two variables, X and Y, representing the proportions of lithium-6 and lithium-7, respectively. Since X and Y are not independent, an additional equation is needed, specifically that their sum equals 1 (X + Y = 1). This allows for solving the two-variable equation. Resources are available online to assist with the calculations.
Mootiek
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
AMU Too many variables...?

Homework Statement



the atomic mass of lithium6 is 6.0151 and the amu of lithium-7 is 7.0160. calculate the natural abuncance of hese two isotopes. use the value of 6.941 amu as the value fr the average atomic mass of lithium


Homework Equations



ave atomic weight = (% of isotope 1)(amu of isotope 1)+(% of isotope 2)*(amu of isotope 2)


The Attempt at a Solution



Okay.. So the equation I set up ends up being

6.941 amu =X(7.0160)+Y(6.0151)

I have 2 variables, so here I get stuck... I have no idea how to solve when I have 2 variables...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need a second equation. X and Y are not independent. What is their sum?
 
This link should help.
http://dbhs.wvusd.k12.ca.us/webdocs/Mole/AvgAtomicWt-Reverse.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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