Hydrogen electrode incoherence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sebastiank007
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrode Hydrogen
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the apparent incoherence in calculating Gibbs free energy (ΔrG°) for hydrogen reactions using different equations. The first equation suggests ΔrG° should be negative, while the second and third equations yield zero, leading to confusion. It is clarified that the discrepancy arises from the entropy of hydration for an electron, which cancels out the entropy of formation of H2(g), resulting in ΔrS° being zero. Additionally, the importance of avoiding calculations of ΔG for half-reactions is emphasized, with suggestions for deriving half potentials directly from known equations. The conversation concludes with a critique of Atkins' physical chemistry textbook, recommending the search for better resources.
sebastiank007
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Today I was studying Atkins physical chemistry basics and I saw a bit of incoherence.

ΔrG°=ΔrH°-TΔr
ΔrG°=ΔfG°(products) - ΔfG°(substrates)
ΔrG°=nFE°

Data: ... ΔfH° ... ΔfG°...ΔS°(J*K*mol-1)
H2(g)...0......0......130,684
H+......0.....0.....0

2H+(aq) 2e- => H2(g)

Using second and third equation second and third equation I get ΔrG°=0
But using first equation I get ΔrG°=ΔrH°-TΔrS°=0-298*130,684= -39 kJ/mol

I thought I can't calculate ΔG for half reaction but I must have used it while calculating Cu2+ + e- => Cu+ potential
from Cu2+ + 2e- => Cu and Cu+ + e- => Cu potentials.

Can someone explain this to me?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
sebastiank007 said:
H+......0.....0.....0

Of all things I don't understand about your post, this is the most striking one. By definition enthalpy of formation is zero for an element in a standard state. H+ is not an element and not in a standard state, so I don't see why its enthalpy of formation is zero.
 
Don't ask me, ask Atkins...
 

Attachments

  • Clipboard01.jpg
    Clipboard01.jpg
    30 KB · Views: 468
Took me a while to figure this one out, but I think I got the answer.

First, it is clear that ΔrG° = 0, since this is what you get from the difference in ΔfG° of the products and reactants and from the standard potential (since E° = 0). So the question is then why does the other equation give ΔrG° ≠ 0? It turns out that there is an entropy of hydration for an electron, and it cancels out the entropy of formation of H2(g), such that ΔrS° = 0.

Reference: H. A. Schwarz, Enthalpy and entropy of formation of the hydrated electron, J. Phys. Chem. 95, 6697 (1991).
 
The explanation of DrClaude sounds convincing. Nevertheless I would try to avoid working with Delta G's for half reactions at all costs. I don't see why you need it. It is rather trivial to calculate the half potential you are want from the half potentials you are given.
Namely taking the three equations
1) Cu2+ + e- => Cu+
2) Cu2+ + 2e- => Cu
3) Cu+ + e- => Cu
You can write symbollically 1=2-3 and literally for the free energies
##\Delta G(1)=\Delta G(2) - \Delta G(3) ##.
Now use ##\Delta G=nFE^0## to get
##E^0(1)=2E^0(2)-E^0(1)##.

PS: Atkins is probably the lousiest book on physical chemistry on hte market. Get a better one.
 
Thanks for your answers. It makes much more sense to me now.
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
Back
Top