Question about the concept of Reaction Rate

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of reaction rates, specifically why some rates are expressed in units of s^{-1} without a corresponding change in property in the numerator. It clarifies that reaction rates are typically defined as changes in concentration over time, while rate constants (k) can have different units depending on the reaction order. The participants discuss the method of calculating rates in a lab setting, particularly in the Iodine Clock Reaction, where rates were determined by taking the inverse of the time for a color change. This approach is valid for zeroth-order reactions, but for more complex reactions, a concentration vs. time plot is necessary to determine the rate. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the distinction between reaction rates and rate constants in chemical kinetics.
Senjai
Messages
104
Reaction score
0
This is not a homework question.

Im curious as to why in some situations rate is described as s^{-1} without a change in property in the numerator.

As i understand, rate is defined as a change of a property over the time elapsed over that change.. How can we have a reaction rate without having a change in property?]

More specifically, this came to my notice in a Iodine Clock Reaction Lab. When graphing the reaction rate vs the concentration of the reacting species.

Thanks much,
Richard.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you looking at the rates at which a certain chemical reaction is occurring or the rate constant (k) for a particular reaction? Rates of chemical reactions (usually expressed as v) are almost always in the units of concentration over time. Rate constants, which are different from rates, come from the rate equation, an expression that relates the concentration of reactants and products to the overall rate of a chemical reaction. For example in a hypothetical reaction of A --> B, the rate equation might look like:

v = k[A]

Meaning that the rate of the reaction is proportional to the concentration of species A. Here the rate constant would have units of s-1.
 
Yes we were using the rate equation..

However when we experimentally determined the rates, we just took the times for the reaction to change color, and calculated the rates as 1 / time for reaction completion..

And i don't understand how we can do that for the rate of the equation..

Someone told me it had to do with the 1 symbolizing one "complete reaction" over that time.

We then used the rates, orders, and concentrations to find k..

Our eqn was: Rate = 2.1 x 10^6[H^+]^1[IO_3^-]^1[HSO_3^-]^1

thanks again, senjai.
 
Senjai said:
Yes we were using the rate equation..

However when we experimentally determined the rates, we just took the times for the reaction to change color, and calculated the rates as 1 / time for reaction completion.

And i don't understand how we can do that for the rate of the equation..

Someone told me it had to do with the 1 symbolizing one "complete reaction" over that time.

This approach is valid only for zeroth-order reactions. For more complicated reactions, you would need to plot our the concentration of product or reactant versus time and fit the curve you generate to a specific function (whose form depends on the rate equation you think the reaction follows). For example, for first order reactions, the amount of reactant will exponentially decay over time.

We then used the rates, orders, and concentrations to find k..

Our eqn was: Rate = 2.1 x 10^6[H^+]^1[IO_3^-]^1[HSO_3^-]^1

thanks again, senjai.

In this case, your rate constant would have units of M-2 s-1 in order to make the units work out (so that the rate is in units of M s-1).
 
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