Discussion Overview
The discussion centers on the appropriate representation of copper (II) chloride dihydrate in a chemical reaction involving aluminum. Participants explore whether to include the dihydrate in the formula when it is dissolved in water, considering implications for writing the reaction equation and ionic equation.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Technical explanation
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- One participant questions whether to write copper (II) chloride as CuCl2.2H2O or simply as CuCl2 when it is dissolved in water, expressing confusion over varying conventions found in different sources.
- Another participant suggests that the water of hydration adds mass to the molecule and should be included if measuring dry weight, but acknowledges that it can be ignored in certain contexts.
- A third participant clarifies that their focus is on weighing the copper retrieved from the reaction to find the concentration of the original solution, raising further questions about how to represent the dihydrate in the reaction equation.
- A participant shares a link to a webpage that discusses the reaction of aluminum with cupric chloride, although its relevance is uncertain.
- One participant concludes that there is no simple answer to the question, indicating that the representation of the reaction depends on the specific context and what one aims to demonstrate.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on whether to include the dihydrate in the chemical formula when writing the reaction. There is no consensus on a definitive approach, as opinions vary based on context and intended application.
Contextual Notes
The discussion highlights the ambiguity surrounding the representation of hydrates in chemical equations, with participants noting that different contexts may warrant different approaches. The implications of including or excluding the dihydrate in the formula are not fully resolved.