Borek said:
Yes, they should be identical.
Unless I am misunderstanding what you are thinking of.
morrobay said:
Hello, Could you show your math from post #7 ? Because I want to be sure I understand your question completely.
Well an issue is that you may not be familiar with this method as proposed by Robert de Levie in his Oxford Chemistry Primer 'Aqueous Acid-Base Equilibria and Titrations'. On the other hand you may be familiar with it - I have no clue how much of de Levie's system is common knowledge and how much was created by him.
Basically our result is that, for any acid, we can write an "acid dissociation function" F
a which is a function in [H
+] and the acid dissociation constants (how to work out F
a is more complicated and I cannot explain it simply; simply assume the function is robust, if you haven't seen the method before) for each acid (or indeed acid, base or salt) in solution, and if we then multiply F
a (for that acid) by C
a for each acid, F
a by C
s for each salt, F
a by C
b for each base and then sum these all together, we will have a function in [H
+] and the acid dissociation constants, and when we then add K
w/[H
+]-[H
+] to this expression and set it to 0, we have an polynomial equation we can solve for [H
+].
With titrations, de Levie shortly shows how to express V
titrant similarly to how we just wrote the entire equation, i.e. V
titrant is a function of V
analyte, all starting concentrations, all equilibrium constants, and H
+.
The issue with normal titrations as Borek said earlier is that we do not start by knowing all starting concentrations. Thus we must carry out the experiment to determine the concentration. However, let us say all starting concentrations are given, as well as V
analyte and all constants, so we can write V
titrant exclusively as a function of [H
+]. Would we get the exactly (mathematically) same results from differentiating this function with respect to [H
+] and setting equal to 0, as we would from using the definition of equivalence point to calculate what volume we need to reach each one and what [H
+] there will be at each one?
Hope this has cleared up what my problem means.
(In other words, I'm asking if the points of 0 gradient directly coincide, in theory, with the equivalence points, or if these are just approximations we take in experimental practice to make it easier to spot the equivalence points?)