Volume of air for complete combustion of alkane

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of oxygen volume required for the complete combustion of an alkane. The volume of oxygen is stated as 25 times 24 dm³, with the number 25 derived from the balanced chemical equation. The 24 dm³ refers to the molar volume of a gas at standard conditions. It is clarified that oxygen is consumed, not produced, during the combustion process. Understanding the balanced equation is essential for determining the correct quantities of reactants involved.
desmond iking
Messages
284
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



according to the model ans, the volime of oxygen produced is 25x 24 dm^3 ...



where does the 25 come from ??



or someone can show me other step of getting the ans ? thanks in advance!

according to the model ans, the volime of oxygen produced is 25x 24 dm^3 ...

ugRLBYr.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20140714_041244[1].jpg
    IMG_20140714_041244[1].jpg
    50.3 KB · Views: 471
Physics news on Phys.org
Isn't that just the 25 from the chemical reaction above?
The 24dm3 is probably the molar volume.
 
The 25 comes from the balanced equation on that 3rd line. Until you have the reaction equation balanced, you can't determine the quantities of each of the reagents involved.

Oxygen is not produced. Oxygen is consumed in the reaction.
 
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