How Do Coefficient Changes Affect Equilibrium Constants?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the equilibrium constant Kp for a modified reaction involving CO, H2, and CH3OH, starting with a known Kp of 2.26 x 10^4 at 298 K. Participants emphasize the need to adjust the coefficients of the reaction to derive the new Kp. They suggest writing the reaction quotients for both the original and modified reactions to analyze their relationship. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding how changes in coefficients affect the equilibrium constant. Overall, the focus is on determining the favored direction of the reaction at equilibrium based on the calculated Kp.
Johnyi
Messages
42
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The reaction below has a equilibrium constant of Kp = 2.26 x 10^4 at 298 K
CO(g) + 2H2(g) <=>CH3OH(g)

Calculate Kp for each of the reactions and predict whether reactants or products will be favored at equilibrium

A. (1/2)CO(g) + H2(g) <=> (1/2)CH3OH(g)


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I know i have to multiply all the coefficients by something..but i just don't know by what. How can i tell?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Write both reaction quotients and see how they are related.
 
Borek said:
Write both reaction quotients and see how they are related.

Im not sure what you mean by this. Can you explain more please
 
Write formulas for equilibrium constants and see if there is no some simple operation that can convert one into the other.
 
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