Stuck on an Empirical Formula Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Themaster711
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Stuck
AI Thread Summary
To determine the empirical formula of pyridine, start by calculating the moles of carbon and hydrogen from the combustion products. The mass of carbon in 1.518 g of CO2 is found by converting CO2 to carbon, yielding approximately 0.414 g of carbon. For water, 0.311 g of H2O gives about 0.034 g of hydrogen. The remaining mass of the original sample, after accounting for carbon and hydrogen, can be attributed to nitrogen, leading to the empirical formula C5H5N. This calculation illustrates the relationship between combustion products and the elemental composition of pyridine.
Themaster711
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Pyridine is recovered from coke-oven gases and is used extensively in the chemical industry, in particular, in the synthesis of vitamins and drugs. Pyridine contains carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen. A 0.546 g sample was burned to produce 1.518 g of carbon dioxide and 0.311 g of water. Determine the empirical formula of pyridine.

Please show me step by step. I can't seem to figure this out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Show what you have tried. How many moles of carbon in the sample? Of hydrogen? Of nitrogen?
 
By using the masses given, I was able to find that for every H2O that is created, there will be 2 CO2 created. I do not know anything about the nitrogen because nothing is said about it in the question. Also, the mass given for the pyridine does me no good because I do not know the formula for it. So far my pyridine is C?H?N?.
 
Themaster711 said:
I do not know anything about the nitrogen because nothing is said about it in the question. Also, the mass given for the pyridine does me no good because I do not know the formula for it.

What is mass of carbon in CO2? Hydrogen in H2O? Can you use this information to calculate mass of nitrogen?
 
Thank you so much. That was all I needed. Problem solved.
 
You are welcome.
 
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