How Do You Simplify Oxidation-Reduction Reactions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter superdude
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difficulty
AI Thread Summary
In the discussion, the user seeks clarification on simplifying oxidation-reduction reactions, specifically regarding the reaction of Na2Cr2O7, HNO3, and Na2SO3. The user understands the concepts of oxidation and reduction but is confused about eliminating certain ions from the equation. It is explained that when separating compounds into their ionic species, only the ions that change oxidation states should be retained, while spectator ions can be disregarded. The importance of correctly assigning charges to the ions is emphasized, and the user is guided on how to split polyatomic ions while maintaining their integrity. The conversation concludes with a question about whether to keep oxygen atoms next to elements when writing half-reactions.
superdude
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello,

Can someone please explain to me something here please? In this oxidation problem

Na2Cr2O7 + HNO3 + Na2SO3 yields NaNO3 + Cr(NO3)3 + Na2SO4 + H2O

I know S is Oxidized and Cr is Reduced. However, when I look at the solution set, I am get completely confused.

They are putting

SO3^2- yields SO4^2- for oxidation and for reduction they have Cr2O7^2- yields 2 Cr ^ 3+.

I understand how to get what is Oxidized and what is reduced.

However, I am having trouble knowing what to eliminate. How can they just get read of the Na2 in the first one and (NO3)3 in the second one? Is there some sort of rule that tells you what you can get rid of? Also, once they do get rid of half of the original ion, how do they assign the charge? Is the charge just the polyatomic charge of sulfite and sulfate?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
open second review, it seems that they separated polyatomic ions from the main elements. is this possible? and would you follow this step for other ox redox reactions?
 
Write down each compound as a sum of its "ionic" species (example: Na_2Cr_2O_7 = 2Na^+ + Cr_2O_7^{2-}). Then you just throw away all the ions that do not change their oxidation states (example: Na^+, NO_3^-, H^+).
 
So would this turn out to be:

2 Na + Cr2O7^2- + H + NO3 2- + 2 Na + SO3 ^ 2- yields Na + NO3 + Cr(NO3)3 + 2 NA + SO4 ^ 3 + H2O

and when you refer to "ionic" species, what are you referring to exactly?

Thanks for the help
 
Last edited:
I mean that you have to include the charges on all species.

Na and H should both have a charge of 1+ (or simply +). Also, the charge on the nitrate ion (NO3) is 1-, not 2-.

And finally, you have yet to split up Cr(NO3)3 into its parts.
 
I think I am beginning to understand this now.

1. Assign ox states, see what is oxidized and what is reduced.

2. "Split the elements", but if it is a polyatomic ion, you keep that together.

In this problem, you would split

Na2Cr2O7 into 2Na^+1 + 2Cr^6 + 7O^-2.

Then you would split HNO3 into H^+1 + NO3^-1.

Disregarding this problem, should you also keep all Oxygen's next to an element?

For Instance:

I2 + HNO3 -------> NaIO3 + NO3

I is oxidized and N is reduced.

would the equation for I be I2 ---------> I03

and for N be NO3^1 ---------> Na^+1.

Thanks in advance
 
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