Solve Eudiometry Problem: NH3 & H2 Mixture, 40 ml Oxygen Added

  • Thread starter Thread starter konichiwa2x
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The problem involves a 50 ml mixture of NH3 and H2 that decomposes into nitrogen and hydrogen upon sparking. After adding 40 ml of oxygen and sparking again, a contraction of 6 ml is observed when the mixture is shaken with alkaline pyrogallol, indicating that 6 ml of oxygen was absorbed. The reaction shows that oxygen reacts with hydrogen to form water, while nitrogen remains unreacted. This information allows for the calculation of the percentage of NH3 in the original mixture. Understanding these steps is crucial for solving the eudiometry problem effectively.
konichiwa2x
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Hi, can someone please explain how to do this problem? I don't even understand the question properly.

50 ml of a mixture of NH3 and H2 was completely decomposed by sparking into nitrogen and hydrogen. 40 ml of Oxygen was then added and the mixture was sparked again. After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was shaken with alkaline pyrogallol and a contraction of 6ml was observed. Calculate the percentage of NH3 in the original mixture. (Assume that nitrogen does not react with Oxygen)

thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
50 ml of a mixture of NH3 and H2 was completely decomposed by sparking into nitrogen and hydrogen.--> This means that NH3 will decompose into N2 and H2. And H2 will remain as H2.

40 ml of Oxygen was then added and the mixture was sparked again.--> O2 added will react with H2 to form H2O. Since given in question is that N2 does not react with O2.

After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was shaken with alkaline pyrogallol and a contraction of 6ml was observed.--> Alkaline pyrogallol will absorb O2. This means that 6ml of the gas is O2.

Then, you can use the information 6ml of O2 to work backward to calculate the percentage of NH3 in the original mixture.
 
thanks fopr explaining that!
 
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