Determination of lattice energy of an ionic compound

AI Thread Summary
Determining the lattice energy of NaCl is challenging due to the difficulty in directly measuring the energy change when solid ionic compounds separate into gaseous ions. The Haber cycle, which utilizes Hess' law, is often employed to calculate lattice energy instead. Direct measurement methods, such as heating NaCl to break it into ions, are complicated by the tendency of oppositely charged ions to clump together, releasing energy and skewing results. Achieving the high temperatures needed to melt salt further complicates the process. Accurate determination of lattice energy requires careful consideration of these factors.
mcfaker
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Hi,

In my book it says that it is difficult to determine the lattice energy of NaCl so they use the Haber cycle which applies Hess' law.
Lattice is the energy change when a solid ionic substance separates into ions in gas phase.

We could simply increase tempetrature until NaCl breaks down into ions & then calculate the heat that has been absorbed. So why do they say that it is difficult to determine the lattice?
Is it because we must achieve very high temperatures to melt salt?


Thank you for helping me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The direct measurement of lattice energy is not possible as prescribed by your method because it is difficult to keep the oppositely charged gaseous ions from clumping together for a stretch of time. As they clump, they release energy and now even more energy has to be supplied to break it and thus the final value wouldn't be accurate.
 
Thank you my man :)
 
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