Question regarding change in enthelpy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marshillboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Change
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between enthalpy change (ΔH) and temperature for ideal gases, as expressed by the equation ΔH=nCpΔT. It clarifies that this equation applies under constant pressure conditions, where volume changes are accounted for by the fixed pressure. The key point is that enthalpy for ideal gases is independent of pressure, particularly at low pressures where real gases behave similarly to ideal gases. This independence allows for the calculation of ΔH using only temperature change (ΔT), without needing to know specific pressure or volume values. Overall, the focus is on understanding why enthalpy change is solely a function of temperature in the context of ideal gases.
Marshillboy
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
This isn't a formal homework question so much as a conceptual question for my own edification.

I'm reading my textbook's section on enthalpy and energy, and given the expression:

ΔH=nCpΔT

It states that, "we can use this expression to represent the change in enthalpy when n moles of an ideal gas are heated, regardless of any conditions on pressure or volume."

I know that the ideal gas law stats that PV = nRT, and thus T is proportional to PV.

How can it be, then, that enthalpy change is only affected by temperature change and not affected by changes in pressure and/or volume? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Marshillboy said:
ΔH=nCpΔT
First, that equation for enthalpy holds for constant pressure. At const. P, the volume will change when T changes of course. But it is taken care of by considering only T because P is fixed.

What the book mentions are "conditions" on P and V. This means that you do not need to know what P is, or what the initial and final volumes are. So long as you know ΔT, you can calculate ΔH.
 
Marshillboy said:
This isn't a formal homework question so much as a conceptual question for my own edification.

I'm reading my textbook's section on enthalpy and energy, and given the expression:

ΔH=nCpΔT

It states that, "we can use this expression to represent the change in enthalpy when n moles of an ideal gas are heated, regardless of any conditions on pressure or volume."

I know that the ideal gas law stats that PV = nRT, and thus T is proportional to PV.

How can it be, then, that enthalpy change is only affected by temperature change and not affected by changes in pressure and/or volume? :confused:
What they are saying it that the enthalpy of an ideal gas is independent of pressure. If we regard the enthalpy (per unit mass) of a pure substance to be a function of pressure and temperature, the we can write:

H = H(T,P)

From this it follows that:

dH=\frac{\partial H}{\partial T}dT+\frac{\partial H}{\partial P}dP
But, by definition,
C_p=\frac{\partial H}{\partial T}
so
dH=C_pdT+\frac{\partial H}{\partial P}dP
For real gases in the limit of low pressures, it has been found experimentally that:
\frac{\partial H}{\partial P}→0
But real gases approach ideal gas behavior in the limit of low pressures. So, for ideal gases, the enthalpy is independent of pressure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
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