What are the oxidizing and reducing agents in this redox reaction?

AI Thread Summary
In the redox reaction H2SO4 (aq) + 2HI (aq) --> SO2 (g) + I2 (s) + 2H2O (l), sulfur in H2SO4 is oxidized, indicating that H2SO4 acts as the reducing agent. Conversely, HI is oxidized to I2, making it the oxidizing agent. The oxidation numbers assigned are H=+1, O=-2, S changes from +6 to +4, and I changes from -1 to 0. The discussion emphasizes the importance of correctly assigning oxidation numbers to identify the agents accurately. Overall, H2SO4 is the reducing agent, while HI is the oxidizing agent in this reaction.
sami23
Messages
69
Reaction score
1
H2SO4 (aq) + 2HI (aq) --> SO2 (g) + I2 (s) + 2H2O (l)

Indicate the oxidizing and reducing agents.
-----------------------------------------------------
I started by assigning oxidation numbers to all the atoms:
H=+1
O=-2
S=+6 to +4
I=-2 to 0

I think H2SO4 is the reducing agent and 2HI is the oxidizing agent. Is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SO4 oxidizes HI to I2. But what is the reducing agent and are my oxidation numbers for the atoms correct?
 
Sulfur gained electrons, and is being oxidized. thus, your reducing agent is H2SO4. I Lost electrons, and thus HI is the oxidizing agent.

this is assuming your oxidation numbers are correct which if i am not mistaken your'e "I" is -1? "H 1+" "I -1" "HI 0"
 
Grogerian said:
Sulfur gained electrons, and is being oxidized.

OIL - oxidation is loss

I Lost electrons, and thus HI is the oxidizing agent.

RIG - reduction is gain.

this is assuming your oxidation numbers are correct which if i am not mistaken your'e "I" is -1? "H 1+" "I -1" "HI 0"

You can't assign ON to molecule, only to atoms, thus HI doesn't have ON, just (neutral) charge.

sami23 said:
I=-2 to 0

For that you will need H2+. No such animal.
 
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