Solve Lowest Energy Resonance Structure

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving for the lowest energy resonance structure in a chemical compound. The original poster expresses difficulty in understanding the process but eventually figures it out. They mention having approximately 20 more structures to analyze and indicate confidence in completing most of them. The conversation briefly touches on the challenges of self-respect in the context of problem-solving. Overall, the thread highlights the process of learning and overcoming obstacles in chemistry.
RLB31384
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Physics news on Phys.org
I figured it out...may need help with some otheres later...think i got 20 left..but I should be able to do most of them...
 
think i got 20 left

Self-respect? Good luck!
 
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