Simple Dilution Problem: Calculating Final Concentration (M)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shafty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dilution
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a dilution problem involving the calculation of the final concentration of an HCl solution after dilution. The user applies the dilution equation C1*V1=C2*V2 correctly, calculating the final concentration as 0.0045 M. However, there is uncertainty about the professor's feedback indicating the answer is incorrect. It is suggested that the issue may relate to significant figures rather than the calculation itself. The user seeks clarification on what might have been overlooked in their approach.
Shafty
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
This problem seems simple enough, yet my professor says my answer is incorrect. Here is the problem.

1 ml of a 0.10 M solution of HCL is added to 21 ml of distilled water. What is the final concentration of the solution (M)?

Im going to use the equation

C1*V1=C2*V2

Where C1 is the initial concentration (M) and C2 is the final Concentration, and V1 is initial Volume, and V2 is final volume

If I add 1ml of HCl to 21ml of H2O, I will have 22ml of solution. This is V2, therefore

C1V1/V2=C2

(0.1M)(1ml)/(22ml)=C2

C2= 0.0045 M

What am I overlooking?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps s/he is nitpicking on the significant figures.

--
 
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