Effect of Temperature on Chemical Equilibrium

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the effect of temperature on chemical equilibrium, specifically addressing the apparent contradiction between the Arrhenius Equation and Le Chatelier's Principle. Participants clarify that the equilibrium constant (K[c]) does not depend on temperature, which seems to conflict with the principle stating that equilibrium shifts favorably towards endothermic reactions when heat is added. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying mathematical expressions in the context of rate laws and the Arrhenius Equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts
  • Familiarity with the Arrhenius Equation
  • Knowledge of rate laws in chemical kinetics
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical expressions and LaTeX formatting
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Le Chatelier's Principle in various chemical reactions
  • Explore the derivation and applications of the Arrhenius Equation
  • Learn about the relationship between activation energy and reaction rates
  • Practice using LaTeX for chemical equations and mathematical expressions
USEFUL FOR

AP Chemistry students, educators in chemistry, and anyone interested in the dynamics of chemical reactions and equilibrium principles.

Bipolarity
Messages
773
Reaction score
2
Hi guys I am a student of AP Chemistry. I am trying to understand the effect of temperature on equilibrium. I know that under the change of temperature, the equilibrium will shift to favor the endothermic process if heat is added and vice versa. But employing the Arrhenius Equation, I see a necessary concentration.
<br /> <br /> Suppose that `&amp;rlhar;`(A, B);<br /> print(`output redirected...`); # input placeholder<br /> A &amp;rlhar; B<br /> According to the definition of rate laws,<br /> Rate*forward = k[A][A];<br /> and<br /> Rate*reverse = k<b><b>;<br /> <br /> <br /> where <br /> k; is the rate constant <br /> [X]; is the respective concentration of substance X.<br /> <br /> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> Also, according to the Arrhenius Equation, for any reaction,<br /> k = A*exp(-E[a]/RT);where <br /> A; is a constant<br /> E[a]; is the activation energy<br /> R is the gas constant<br /> T is the temperature at which the reaction<br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> According to the definition of the equilibrium constant,<br /> <br /> K[c] = k[A]/k<b> and k[A]/k<b> = A[1]*exp(-E[a1]/RT)/(A[2]*exp(-E[a2]/RT)) and A[1]*exp(-E[a1]/RT)/(A[2]*exp(-E[a2]/RT)) = A[1]*exp(E[a2]-E[a1])/A[2];<br /> Therefore the K[c]; does not depend on T, which contradicts with Le Chatelier&#039;s Principle!<br /> How can I resolve this paradox, or what is the fault with my logic?<br /> <br /> </b></b></b></b>
 
Last edited:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Bipolarity said:
Hi guys I am a student of AP Chemistry. I am trying to understand the effect of temperature on equilibrium. I know that under the change of temperature, the equilibrium will shift to favor the endothermic process if heat is added and vice versa. But employing the Arrhenius Equation, I see a necessary concentration.
Suppose that <br /> `&amp;rlhar;`(A, B);<br /> print(`output redirected...`); # input placeholder<br /> A &amp;rlhar; B<br /> According to the definition of rate laws,<br /> &gt; Rate*forward = k[A][A];<br /> and<br /> &gt; Rate*reverse = k<b><b>;<br /> <br /> <br /> where <br /> &gt; k;<br /> is the rate constant <br /> [X]<br /> is the respective concentration of substance X.<br /> <br /> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> Also, according to the Arrhenius Equation, for any reaction,<br /> / E[a]\<br /> k = A exp|- ----|<br /> \ RT /<br /> where <br /> <br /> A<br /> is a constant<br /> E[a]<br /> is the activation energy<br /> R is the gas constant<br /> T is the temperature at which the reaction<br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> According to the definition of the equilibrium constant,<br /> <br /> / E[a1]\ / E[a1]\ <br /> A[1] exp|- -----| A[1] exp|- -----| <br /> k[A] k[A] \ RT / \ RT / <br /> K[c] = ---- and ---- = ----------------- and ----------------- = <br /> k<b> k<b> / E[a2]\ / E[a2]\ <br /> A[2] exp|- -----| A[2] exp|- -----| <br /> \ RT / \ RT / <br /> <br /> A[1] exp(E[a2] - E[a1])<br /> -----------------------<br /> A[2] <br /> Therefore the <br /> K[c]<br /> does not depend on T, which contradicts with Le Chatelier&#039;s Principle!<br /> How can I resolve this paradox, or what is the fault with my logic? </b></b></b></b>


It's your maths, you are forgetting that eA/eB is eA-B not eA/B. :smile:
 
What?? How were you able to read that?? I can't get LaTeX to work... I'm new to this sorry. I use Maple but don't know how to translate it to LaTeX.

In any case, thank you SO MUCH FOR YOUR POST! IT FINALLY MAKES SENSE!

Regards,

BiP
 
LatTeX here is used just for formulas, besides, what you wrote was not in LaTeX. See our LaTeX guide.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K