Calculating Volume Change of a Gas with Constant Temperature and Pressure

Thread starter BittersweetLove
Start date Nov 28, 2007
Tags

Volume

AI Thread Summary

To calculate the new volume of a gas when the amount of gas changes, the ideal gas law can be applied, keeping temperature and pressure constant. Given an initial volume of 2.75 L for 0.766 mol of gas, increasing the amount to 2.89 mol requires recalculating the volume. The correct new volume, based on the ratio of moles, should be approximately 3.00 L, not 5.84 L. The initial calculation was incorrect, prompting a reevaluation of the solution. Accurate application of the ideal gas law is essential for determining volume changes under constant conditions.

Nov 28, 2007

BittersweetLove

Homework Statement

A gas with a volume of 2.75 L is known to contain 0.766 mol. Keeping the temperature and pressure constant, if the amount of gas is increased to 2.89 mol, what will be the new volume?

The attempt at a solution

I got 5.84 L. Is that correct?

Physics news on Phys.org

Nov 28, 2007

chemisttree

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Gold Member

That's not what I get.

Nov 28, 2007

BittersweetLove

Alrighty thanks...Let me try again.

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...

View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

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...

View full post »