Deriving the cooridinate numbers of both ions in rock salt

AI Thread Summary
To derive the coordinate numbers of ions in rock salt, one must understand that the coordinate number refers to the number of surrounding atoms in a solid-state lattice. The discussion highlights the importance of considering lattice enthalpy differences among compounds like LiCl, NaCl, LiF, and MgO. It is suggested that LiCl has a larger lattice energy due to the significant electronegativity difference between its ions. Participants emphasize the need for initial effort in problem-solving before seeking help. Understanding these concepts is crucial for analyzing ionic compounds and their properties.
rastamanrm
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
How would I go about deriving the cooridinate numbers of both ions in rock salt, and,
how could I account for the differences in lattice enthalpy between the following;


LiCl (861 kJ/mole) - NaCl (787)
LiCl - LiF (1046)
LiCl - MgO (3850)

Cheers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rasta,

We can not help until you first show us what effort you have made. Please read the posting guidelines (see "Rules" on top of page).
 
Gokul43201 said:
rasta,

We can not help until you first show us what effort you have made. Please read the posting guidelines (see "Rules" on top of page).

Well I do know that a coordinate number is the number of atoms surrounding an atom in a solid state lattice

And for the second bit, I assume LiCl would have a larger lattice energy due to the greater difference in electronegativity of both consituents, similar with the next one. Not sure about the last one.
 
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