Determining the Appropriate Oxidation State of Chromium in a Reaction

  • Thread starter Thread starter mystix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Oxidation State
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the appropriate oxidation state of chromium in the reaction between chromium and silver nitrate. Participants suggest using the most stable oxidation state when it is not specified, which in this case would be Chromium (III) Nitrate. The consensus is that if the oxidation state cannot be determined from the reaction, opting for the most stable state is a reliable rule. This approach ensures accurate predictions of the products formed in the reaction. Understanding oxidation states is crucial for correctly balancing chemical equations and predicting reaction outcomes.
mystix
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I am working out a reaction and I was wondering if someone could tell me which oxidation state of chromium should be used?

Cr(s) + AgNO3(aq) -> Cr(NO3)?(aq) + Ag(s)

Do I use Chromium (II) Nitrate or Chromium (III) Nitrate? How do I know which one to use?

If anyone could help explain which oxidation state of Chromium is correct, I would really appreciate it!

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
III

wikipedia
 
Thanks rocophysics!

So, if you aren't given the oxidation state, always use the most stable oxidation state?

Is this a rule?
 
Yes. If there is no way to determine which oxidation state is involved in the given reaction, pick the most stable one (under the conditions).
 
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