Reverse Reactions: Standard Enthalpy & Thermodynamics

  • Thread starter Thread starter dissolver
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reactions Reverse
AI Thread Summary
A thermodynamically favored reaction occurring in both forward and reverse directions suggests that the standard enthalpy change is near zero. This indicates that the energy difference between reactants and products is minimal. When the rates of the forward and reverse reactions are comparable, the standard Gibbs Free Energy change also approaches zero. This relationship highlights the balance between enthalpy and entropy in reversible reactions. Understanding these concepts is crucial for analyzing reaction spontaneity and equilibrium.
dissolver
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
If it is thermodynamically favored for a reaction to occur forward and reverse, does that mean that the standard enthalpy of the reaction is close to 0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dissolver said:
If it is thermodynamically favored for a reaction to occur forward and reverse, does that mean that the standard enthalpy of the reaction is close to 0?
If the forward and reverse reaction rates are comparable, you will find the the standard Gibbs Free Energy change for the reaction is close to 0.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Chemistry How to determine whether a single reaction is better than multi-stage reaction?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Chemistry Does Combusting Different Amounts of Propane Change Final Temperature?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Chemistry How Do I Find the Molar Enthalpy Change for Reactions 2 and 3?
Replies
10
Views
3K
Thermodynamics Question Regarding Gibbs Free Energy, Enthalpy, Entropy
Replies
1
Views
2K
Chemistry A calculation of enthalpy, entropy, and Gibbs energy of vaporization
Replies
1
Views
1K
Chemistry How do we use enthalpy of formation in this calculation?
Replies
9
Views
2K
State of matter by reversing reaction
Replies
1
Views
8K
Can Non-Spontaneous Reactions Occur When Coupled with Exergonic Reactions?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Thermodynamics of chemical reactions
Replies
28
Views
2K
Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem
Replies
12
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top