Effects of OH- Increase on Alkalinity, Acidity, and pH

AI Thread Summary
An increase in OH- ions in a solution leads to higher alkalinity and lower acidity, resulting in a higher pH. The relationship between pH and pOH is defined by the equation pH + pOH = 14. When OH- is added, it bonds with H3O+ ions, effectively reducing their concentration. This process confirms that increased OH- concentration correlates with increased alkalinity. Understanding these concepts is essential for grasping the dynamics of pH in chemical solutions.
n108
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
An increase in the OH- in a solution would result in

an increase in alkalinity (baseness).

an increase in acidity.

a pH of 7.

a decrease in pH.

i think it would be - an increase in alkalinity, but I am not sure
help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you add OH- to a solution, what does it bond with (i.e. remove some of from the solution)?

And what does that have to do with the definition of pH?

You're correct, but you should be able to be more confident in your guess
 
Thanks for the help!
 
pH is the negative of the log of the concentration of H3O+ ions (sometimes also called H+ ions) so the formula is:
pH = -log[H3O+]

The same is true for pOH except this time you are looking at the concentration of OH- ions:
pOH = -log[OH-]

And always remember pH + pOH = 14
so yes, if you increase the OH- ion concentration, you increase Alkalinity (and decrease acidity)
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top