Can Equilibrium Be Achieved at 1 atm for N_2, H_2, and NH_3?

AI Thread Summary
Equilibrium for the reaction N2 + 3H2 <--> 2NH3 can be evaluated at 1 atm for each gas using thermodynamic principles. The relationship ΔG = ΔH° - TΔS° is utilized to determine the temperature at which equilibrium occurs, with ΔG set to zero. However, it is clarified that at equilibrium, ΔG° is not zero, leading to confusion regarding the existence of such a temperature. The correct interpretation involves using the equation ΔG° = -RT ln K_eq, where K_eq is expressed in terms of pressure and temperature. This discussion highlights the complexities in achieving equilibrium under specified conditions.
breez
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
N_2 (g) + 3H2(g) <--> 2NH3(g)

\Delta H^{\circ} of NH3 = -46.2 kJ/mol
\Delta G^{\circ} of NH3 = -16.7 kJ/mol

At what temperature can N_2, H_2, and NH_3 gases by maintained at equilibrium each with a partial pressure of 1 atm?

The solution my book uses is to solve for T in the equation \Delta G = \Delta H^{\circ} - T\Delta S^{\circ} with \Delta G = 0

Is this relationship true?

Also, how can you be sure that at that temperature, the pressures will all be 1 atm?

I thought \Delta G = \Delta G^{\circ} + RT \ln Q?

If reactants/products are all 1 atm, then ln Q = 0, and \Delta G^{\circ} must equal zero, which it clearly does not, thus there shouldn't exist a temperature where this is possible.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Careful, at equilibrium delta G is zero, not delta G naught

At equilibrium


delta G naught=-RT lnKeq

you are given delta G naught, you know R, what is Keq expression in terms of pressure and temperature?
 
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