Electrolysis and reduced mass of a metal bar

AI Thread Summary
When a copper bar is placed in a solution of hydrochloric acid and water, its weight decreases due to electrolysis, despite copper's general resistance to HCl. The electrolysis process involves reactions at the electrodes that can lead to the loss of copper mass. The weight loss can be quantified using a general formula that considers the amount of current passed and the electrochemical equivalent of copper. Understanding the specific reactions occurring during electrolysis is crucial to explain this phenomenon. The discussion emphasizes the importance of differentiating between electrolysis and dissolution in this context.
Medicol
Messages
223
Reaction score
54
1. Insert a bar of copper of m(gram) into (HCl + H2O). After a while, its weight become m_1 (gram) which is smaller than m. Explain why and give a general formula to find m_1



2. None



3. I keep thinking how that becomes possible, because I learn that Cu can't react with HCl+H2O
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Question states "electrolysis", you are thinking in terms of dissolution.
 
Borek said:
Question states "electrolysis", you are thinking in terms of dissolution.

my exercise is in Cu and Electrolysis chapter, I don't know how to explain why Cu's weight is lost over a short time.
 
Last edited:
Then read the chapter, it explains what reactions take place on the electrode during electrolysis.
 
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