Nernst potential and reverse potentials

AI Thread Summary
To find the reversal potential for a membrane equally permeable to sodium and potassium, the Goldman equation is typically used, which incorporates the concentrations of both ions. For a membrane permeable to sodium, potassium, and chloride, the same equation can be applied, adjusting for the concentration of chloride as well. The Nernst potential for each ion can be calculated using the Nernst equation, which requires the internal and external concentrations of the ions. Fick's law is not directly used for calculating the Nernst potential; rather, it describes diffusion processes. Understanding these equations is crucial for accurately determining reversal and Nernst potentials in cellular physiology.
madbeemer
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I know the following
ion/inside cell/outside cell
Cl- 5mM 150 mM
K+ 130mM 5mM
Na+ 20mM 140mM
Ca2+ 10^-4mM 2mM

How would I find the reversal potential for conductance equally permeable to sodium and potassium?
How do I find the reversal potential for a conductance equally permeable to sodium, potassium, and chlorine?
Also, how do I find the nernst potential for each ion at the below external and internal concentrations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Helllp, please! I tried and phailed T_T

You use fick's law to get nernst right?
 
madbeemer said:
Helllp, please! I tried and phailed T_T

You use fick's law to get nernst right?
Have you looked at this?
 
Yes. How I use it?
 
For reversal potential
 
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