Ideal Gas Expansion: Reversible Process Calc.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the final temperature (T2) and thermodynamic values (q, w, ΔE, ΔH) for the reversible expansion of one mole of an ideal gas. Participants emphasize the importance of first determining the final pressure (P2) using the provided equation P = P1 − 0.005000(V − V1). The initial temperature (T1) has already been calculated using the ideal gas law. The conversation encourages sharing previous calculations to guide further steps. The goal is to accurately complete the thermodynamic analysis of the gas expansion process.
nancy awwad
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
One mole of an ideal gas having CV = 25.0 J.K−1 is in a volume V1 = 28.0 L at P1 =
1.00 bar. It is expanded reversibly along a path given by P = P1 − 0.005000(V − V1) to
a final volume V2 = 100.0 L. Calculate the final temperature T2 and the values of q,
w, ΔE, ΔH for this change in state.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF, nancy_awwad! :smile:

It would help if you would show some of what you tried.
Then we could better point you in the right way.

Let's start with P2.
Can you calculate it from the formula you already have?
 
we already know that PV=nRT then i ve calculated T1
 
nancy awwad said:
we already know that PV=nRT then i ve calculated T1

Good!
So what is T1?

To find T2 you first need to find P2.

Can you calculate P2 using P = P1 − 0.005000(V − V1)?
 
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