Chemistry Solving Unknown Metal Moles in Chemistry Exam

  • Thread starter Thread starter bjr_jyd15
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metal Moles
AI Thread Summary
To solve the chemistry exam question, the balanced equation for the reaction is M + F2 -> MF2. Given that 0.600 mol of metal M reacts with excess fluorine, the formation of 46.8 g of MF2 indicates that there are 1.2 moles of fluorine (F) in the compound. The mass of M in MF2 can be calculated using the molar mass of MF2, which leads to determining the identity of metal M. The calculations confirm that the coefficients in the balanced equation are correct, and the problem can be resolved with these steps. Understanding stoichiometry is crucial for solving such chemistry problems effectively.
bjr_jyd15
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
here's a question from my recent chem exam that i don't know how to approach:

a sample of 0.600 mol of a metal M reacts completely with excess fluorine to form 46.8 g MF2

a) how many moles of F are in the sample of the compound that forms?

b) how many grams of M are in this sample of MF2?

c) what element is represented by the symbol M?

i started to try to write a balanced equation for this but I'm not sure if the coeffecients would be right...

any help? thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the balanced equation is just going to be M + F2 -> MF2
 
so there would be 1.2 mol of F in the compound right
 
Yep.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
11K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top