Empirical Formula for Magnesium Oxide

  • Thread starter Thread starter Atropine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Magnesium
AI Thread Summary
The empirical formula for magnesium oxide is MgO, which results from the combination of magnesium in a +2 oxidation state and oxygen in a -2 oxidation state to form a neutral compound. While magnesium oxide can also exist in other forms like Mg2O2 or Mg3O3, the simplest ratio of magnesium to oxygen is 1:1, leading to the empirical formula MgO. Understanding this concept is crucial, as it illustrates the relationship between the elements in a compound. The discussion emphasizes the need for clarity on empirical formulas, especially for students new to the topic. Overall, grasping the basic principles of oxidation states and molecular neutrality is essential for understanding magnesium oxide's empirical formula.
Atropine
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm currently trying to understand the concept that my chemistry teacher wants me to figure out. We are not doing stoichiometry. We haven't even gotten the definition for it. Now I need to find the empirical formula for magnesium Oxide.

My friends kept telling me (MgO) Which I didnt fully understand but I wanted to know if anyone would be able to help me because I'm really in a pickle right now.

I can give you more information if you would be so kind to contact me ASAP.

*Amanda
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Emprical formula - http://www.towson.edu/~ladon/empiric.html

Magnesium Oxide - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium_oxide

Now why is the formula MgO? Magnesium exists in an oxidation state of +2 and oxygen -2. To make a neutral molecule one magnesium must combine with one oxygen. It talkes about empirical formulas since magnesium oxide can exist as a crystal and could have formulas such as Mg2O2, Mg3O3, etc
 
I've seen those sites but thank you for responding. Its rather fuzzy of an idea. And I'm still moderatly confused.
 
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