Chemistry Helium & Argon Diffusivity: 10% He Lost, What % Ar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter groovayness
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecular
AI Thread Summary
Helium has a molecular diffusivity that is three times greater than that of Argon, which impacts the loss rates of these gases in a mixture. When a tank charged with equal parts of He and Ar is exposed to air, the loss of He will influence the loss of Ar due to their differing diffusivities. The discussion centers on calculating the percentage of Argon lost when 10% of Helium is lost. Participants emphasize the importance of engaging with the academic material rather than seeking straightforward answers. Understanding the principles of gas diffusivity is crucial for solving the problem effectively.
groovayness
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Helium has a molecular diffusivity three times greater than that for Argon. If a tank of water is charged with 0.5 atm of He and 0.5 atm of Ar and then allowed to stand in open contact wiht air, what percent of the Ar will have been lost when 10 percent of the He has been lost?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Get one thing straight - homework is not fun for you or anyone else - if you want others to assist you show some interest in your academic endeavor.
 
you don't have to be an ass about it..what the **** do you want me to do if i don't even know where to start?
 
I suggest that you read the following

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=94384
 
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