Strength comparison of Para/Dia-magnetism

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the weight of substances in a magnetic field, the focus is on the comparison between diamagnetism and paramagnetism. The question posed involves SnCl3, FeCl3, TiCl3, and VCl3, with a debate over which weighs less due to magnetic properties. The consensus is that SnCl3 is diamagnetic, while the others are paramagnetic, with Fe3+ noted for having five unpaired electrons, enhancing its paramagnetic nature. The discussion highlights the rarity of observing diamagnetism compared to the more pronounced effects of paramagnetism in magnetic fields. Ultimately, the debate centers on the relative influence of these magnetic properties on the apparent weight of the substances.
AGNuke
Gold Member
Messages
455
Reaction score
9
Which one of the following weighs less when weighted in magnetic field?

A>SnCl3
B>FeCl3
C>TiCl3
D>VCl3

This is the question I encountered in my Chemistry Olympiad. While I went with B, my institute published answer as A.

What I deduced is that A is diamagnetic while the rest are paramagnetic, if we look at the respective cation's electronic configuration.

If I am right, diamagnetism is the virtue of every substance and thus, it is rare to observe its effect compared to paramagnetism. I also think that Fe3+ is a good paramagnet, owing to 5 unpaired electrons.

This question poses one dilemma - which property is more profound. Obviously, whatever effect is more profound can cause the substance to react to magnetic field and give apparent weight less than actual weight. (Magnetic field supposedly set that way)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You sure that A) wasn't SnCl3-?
 
No. All the species were neutral. But I don't think that diamagnetism is as profound effect as paramagnetism.
 
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

Back
Top