Understanding Relative Abundance in Chemistry: A Comprehensive Guide

AI Thread Summary
Relative abundance in chemistry refers to the measurement of the quantity of a specific component in relation to a standard component that remains unaffected by the variables of interest. It is often expressed in units such as per 10,000 or per 1 million of a standard element, commonly silicon (Si). This concept is crucial for understanding the distribution of elements or isotopes in various contexts, including geochemistry and ecology. Searching for "relative abundance" online yields extensive information across different fields, highlighting its broad applicability. Understanding this term is essential for accurately interpreting data in lab reports and scientific research.
sinnie16
Man, I have a lab report for Chemistry due on Monday, and I've been working on in for a week. I have one problem.

What does relative abundance tell you?

I've searched on Google and even looked in the index of my Chemistry book. Nada. Nil. Cero.

Any help is very much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not familiar with the term. What are the units on it?
 
"Relative abundance?" Check a few geochem sources; cosmic,solar, terrestrial, and crustal abundances are sometimes expressed as "relative abundances" --- usually per 10k Si (why 10k? Why not?)

Edit: Just got back from prowling "Yoohoo" --- " per 1M Si" --- so, it's been a few years.

Really, "relative abundance" in any search engine will give you more information than enough on "relative abundance" of everything from "the common grebe in marshlands of eastern N. Amer." to the more familiar (to me) elemental abundances.

The name of the game is to pick a "standard" component of a system that is "inert/unaffected" by variables which interest you, and to measure/quantify the abundances of other components which are affected by comparing their abundances to your "inert" standard, hence, "relative abundance."
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Replies
43
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Back
Top