How Many Grams of CO2 Are Collected at 104.3 kPa and 29.6°C?

AI Thread Summary
To determine the grams of CO2 collected at 104.3 kPa and 29.6°C, the ideal gas law equation PV=nRT is applicable. The initial confusion stemmed from insufficient information to apply this equation directly. However, insights from previous questions in the assignment helped clarify the relationship between the combustion of hydrocarbons and the volume of CO2 produced. By establishing a chemical equation based on the combustion reaction, the volume of CO2 can be calculated. Ultimately, understanding the connections between the problems was key to finding the solution.
Korupt
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If carbon dioxide is collected at 104.3 kPa and 29.6 oC, how many grams are collected? Use the gas constant of 0.08206 L. atm/mol . K.

1. Liters at STP.
2. Grams at new temperature and pressure.

Homework Equations


PV=nRT


The Attempt at a Solution


I really don't understand what the problem wants me to do, there's not enough info to use PV=nRT equation and I don't know any other ideal gas ones except for the Combined Gas Law Equation which is also not applicable. Perhaps it has something to do with the earlier part of the problem which is all here: http://www.duluthhigh.org/tpindexy.php?page=myhome&id=104 but it doesn't seem to. I solved 1-5 but with 6 and 7 I really have no clue and this is a summer assignment so we really haven't learned anything yet. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It sounds to me that it does depend on the previous questions. You found the molecular formula of the unknown hydrocarbon in question 2, and then are told that "53.21 L of the substance burns in 84.31 L of oxygen". You can write a chemical equation for the combustion and use the volumes of the limiting reagent to find how much carbon dioxide is produced.
 
Thanks, I was able to figure it out that way.
 
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