Henry's Law: Solving for Water Needed to Dissolve 1.48L of Gas

  • Thread starter Thread starter LisaNels2196
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
AI Thread Summary
To determine the amount of water needed to dissolve 1.48L of gas at 730 torr and 28°C, the Henry's law constant of 0.190 M/atm is applied. Converting 730 torr to atmospheres gives approximately 0.9605 atm. Using the equation S = kH * Pgas, the solubility (S) is calculated as 0.1825 M, which corresponds to about 0.2701 moles of gas. The discussion highlights confusion regarding the conversion from moles of gas to the volume of water required for dissolution. Clarification is needed on how to calculate the liters of water based on the moles of gas dissolved.
LisaNels2196
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


How much water would be needed to completely dissolve 1.48L of the gas at a pressure of 730torrand a temperature of 28∘C? A gas has a Henry's law constant of 0.190M/atm

Homework Equations


S=kH * Pgas

The Attempt at a Solution


730 torr= .960526316 atm

S=(.190M/atm)(.960526316 atm)
S= .1825 M
.1825 mol = X = .2701 moles
1 L 1.48L

After solving that part I don't understand how to get liters of water. Maybe PV=nRT... but I tried that and I got the answer wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How many moles of the gas? How many dissolved per liter of water?
 
.2701 moles of the gas
 
No. 1.48 L of gas at 730 torr and 28°C is not 0.27 moles.
 
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