Standard corrections to GFE for uni and bi molecular rxns

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating free energy changes in multi-step mechanisms, particularly when transitioning from gas phase calculations at 1 atm to modeling in solvent at a 1M standard state. The key point is that when applying the correction term RT*ln(RT), the impact on delta G depends on the change in the number of moles during reactions. In unimolecular and bimolecular reactions, the corrections tend to cancel out, but in cases where the number of moles changes—such as a reaction producing more moles (A --> B + C) or consuming moles (B + C --> D)—the corrections do not cancel. The sign of the correction term will be positive for reactions that increase the number of moles and negative for those that decrease it. This leads to significant adjustments in delta G, potentially altering values by several kcal/mol. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding when these correction terms are relevant based on the stoichiometry of the reactions involved.
Einstein Mcfly
Messages
161
Reaction score
3
Hello everyone. I have a weird question regarding the calculation of free energy changes in a multi-step mechanism. Now, if you have a bunch of calculated free energies in gas phase at 1 atm (say, from an electronic structure program) and you want to model in solvent, you need to get them in a 1M standard state and this requires adding an additional term RT*ln(RT). Now, if every step in your mechanism is either unimolecular or bimolecular, there will be no change in the concentration of anything as the total number of moles of things will all stay constant and these corrections will all cancel when you calculate the delta Gs. However, if you have some mixing of them, such as
1) AB--> A +B
2) B+C->D
etc.
then in the first case you've added a mole and in the second case you've removed a mole. Therefore, when I calculate the delta G for these steps, the sign of RT*ln(RT) should be positive in the first case and negative in the second case, correct? You won't get cancellation when you calculate the delta Gs and these corrections will tweek things by three or so kcal/mol. Am I on the right track here or am I missing something?

Thanks for any help you can give.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
How can you predict the sign of delta G only by counting moles on the reactant side and product side?
 
Sorry, I'm not talking about getting the sign of delta G, I'm talking only about the correction in going from 1 atm to 1M. In that case delta G is the difference between the Gs at STP plus the difference between the correction terms for each G. Clearly the effect of the correction term will be zero if one mole goes to one mole or two moles go to two moles, but what about one mole going to two (as in A-->B+C) or two going to one (C+D-->F)?

I just want to make sure that I'm correct about when the correction term will figure in (that is, not cancel out).
 
I want to test a humidity sensor with one or more saturated salt solutions. The table salt that I have on hand contains one of two anticaking agents, calcium silicate or sodium aluminosilicate. Will the presence of either of these additives (or iodine for that matter) significantly affect the equilibrium humidity? I searched and all the how-to-do-it guides did not address this question. One research paper I found reported that at 1.5% w/w calcium silicate increased the deliquescent point by...
Back
Top