How to Make a 0.3 M Sucrose Solution in the Lab?

Thread starter v3ra
Start date Jan 30, 2013

AI Thread Summary

To prepare a 0.3 M sucrose solution, first calculate the amount of sucrose needed using the formula: moles = molarity × volume (in liters). For 500 mL of a 0.3 M solution, 0.3 moles per liter multiplied by 0.5 liters equals 0.15 moles of sucrose. Next, convert moles to grams using the molar mass of sucrose, which is approximately 342.3 g/mol, resulting in about 51.4 grams of sucrose. Dissolve this amount in enough water to reach a final volume of 500 mL. This process ensures the correct molarity for the solution.

Jan 30, 2013

v3ra

Homework Statement

Explain the steps you would follow to make 500 mL of a 0.3 M solution of sucrose (C12H22O11) in the lab.

I am not sure where to begin with this problem. Any assistance would be much appreciated.

Physics news on Phys.org

Jan 30, 2013

ChiralWaltz

What does the M stand for?

Jan 30, 2013

v3ra

molar concentration

Jan 30, 2013

ChiralWaltz

what is the definition of a mole and molar concentration?

Jan 31, 2013

v3ra

i figured it out myself.

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...

View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

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...

View full post »