Chemistry - Change of freezing point

AI Thread Summary
To determine the freezing point of mercury at the bottom of a 10.0m column, one must consider the effects of pressure on the freezing point due to the column's height. The enthalpy of fusion for mercury is 2.292 kJ/mol, and its normal freezing point is 234.3K. The change in molar volume upon melting is +0.517 cm^3/mol, which also plays a role in the calculations. Utilizing the Clausius-Clapeyron relation can provide insight into how pressure affects the freezing point. Understanding these relationships is crucial for solving the problem effectively.
ChemistryJack
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The enthalpy of fusion of mercury is 2.292kJ/mol and its normal freezing point s 234.3K with a change in molar volume of +0.517cm^3 /mol on melting. At what temperature will the bottom of a column of mercury (density 13.6 g/cm^3) of height 10.0m be expected to freeze.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I'm really not sure how to go about this. I though I could work out the Potential energy, using P = mgh. Then maybe take this off the enthalpy of fusion. I don't want the answer, but some though-provoking advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Phase transition, pressure, temperature, volume change and enthalpy - that cries for a specific equation (relation). It is most often used for boiling points, but it works for every transition.
 
Clausius-Clapeyron?
 
That's what I would try.
 
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