How Do You Calculate the Initial Rate of H2O2 Disappearance?

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the initial rate of H2O2 disappearance, first determine the moles of H2O2 present in the solution. The total volume of the solution is 500 mL, and the concentration of H2O2 is 0.10 M, leading to 0.0075 moles of H2O2. The reaction time is 1.9 minutes, so the initial rate can be calculated by dividing the moles of H2O2 by the time in minutes. This results in an initial rate of 0.00395 M min-1, which rounds to 0.0040 M min-1 when expressed to two significant figures. Understanding the reaction equation and speed calculation is essential for solving similar problems.
chemnerd666
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In the reaction between H2O2 and I-, 15 mL of 0.30M KI, 75. mL of 0.10M H2O2 and 21 mL of 0.020M Na2S2O3 were mixed in a flask containing starch and buffer and the total volume was made up to 500mL with distilled water. The solution turned blue (indicating the presence of I2) in 1.9 minutes. Calculate the initial rate of disappearance of H2O2 in units of M min-1 to two significant figures.



Homework Equations


Not sure


The Attempt at a Solution


I really have no clue how to answer this question, any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Reaction equation?

Once you have that ready, can you write equation for reaction speed?

--
methods
 
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