Is Releasing Hydrogen Ions the Defining Characteristic of Arrhenius Acids?

AI Thread Summary
The defining characteristic of Arrhenius acids is that they release hydrogen ions in aqueous solution, making option c) true. Options a) and b) are incorrect, as not all ionic compounds containing hydrogen are acids, and a pH greater than 7 indicates a base, not an acid. Option d) is also false since an Arrhenius acid cannot be a neutral molecule. The consensus is that only option c) accurately reflects the definition of an Arrhenius acid. Understanding these distinctions clarifies the properties of acids in aqueous solutions.
alias_grace
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
An Arrhenius acid
a) in an ionic compound that contains hydrogen atoms
b) produces an aqueous solution whose pH is greater than 7
c) releases hydrogen ions in aqueous solution
d) is always a neutral molecule


I know that c) is true and d) is false. However, I don't know if a) and b) are within the definition of Arrhenius acid. My guess is that only c) is true. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to the Arrhenius definition, an acid is any substance, which when dissolved in water, tends to increase the amount of H+

so my guess would be that C is always true, the others aren't necessarily true.
 
Yes, C is correct by defintion.

a is false because there are some ionic compounds that contain hydrogen atoms and are not acids- ie. NH4NO3, NaHCO3

b is false because >7 pH is a base

d wouldn't be an acid or a base
 
Thank you. I was trying to think of things to disprove the other answers to validate my answer :)
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top