Finding pH of solutions with an acid and base

  • Thread starter Thread starter mirandab17
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acid Base Ph
AI Thread Summary
To find the pH of the solution formed by adding 0.040 mol KOH to 2.00 L of 0.020 M HCl, one must consider the neutralization reaction between the strong acid and strong base. The reaction produces water and KCl, and the final pH depends on the limiting reagent. Since both HCl and KOH are strong, the remaining substance after the reaction determines the pH. If all reactants are consumed, the resulting solution will be neutral, primarily consisting of water and KCl. Additionally, ionic strength may need to be considered for accurate pH calculations.
mirandab17
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
What is the pH of the solution formed when 0.040 mol KOH is added to 2.00 L of 0.020 m HCl?

Hello all!

I'm really struggling with this. I set up the change table with the reaction of KOH + HCl <> H2O + KCl, and so I end up with Ka = x/(.01-x)(0.2-x). What Ka value would I use?

I may be completely wrong. Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Both are strong, so it is just a limiting reagent question. Whatever is left is responsible for the final pH. If nothing is left, than you have just water solution of NaCl.

Could be you are expected to take ionic strength into account.
 
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