What Are the New Equilibrium Concentrations After Removing 1.0 mol/L of SO2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dnartS
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equilibrium
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the new equilibrium concentrations after removing 1.0 mol/L of SO2 from a reaction mixture of O2 and SO2 forming SO3. Initially, 8.0 moles of O2 and 10.0 moles of SO2 are present in a 2.0L container, with 3.0 moles/L of SO3 remaining at equilibrium. Participants suggest using an ICE table to determine the initial concentrations and the shifts in equilibrium after the removal of SO2. The need for calculating the equilibrium constant is also mentioned, emphasizing the importance of stoichiometry in these calculations. The thread highlights the challenges faced by students in understanding equilibrium shifts and concentration calculations.
dnartS
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
8.0 mole of O2(g) is mixed with 10.0 moles of SO2(g) in a 2.0L container forming SO3(g). If 3.0 moles/L of SO3(g) remains at equilibrium. 1.0 mol/L of SO2(g) is removed from the equilibrium, calculate the new eq'm [ ]'s.So I make the rice table

3O2(g) + SO2(g) <--> 2SO3(g)
r 3 ... : ... 1 ... : 2
4.0M ... 5.0M ... 0M (shift right)
c -3x ... -3x ... +2x
e 4.0 -3x ... 5.0-3x ... 2xwhat do I do now?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Guise I need help on this homework question please, it's really bothering me and I am stuck.
 
What were the concentrations of all gases before SO2 was removed? Can you calculate them from the stoichiometry? After they are calculated - can you use them to calculate equilibrium constant?

--
methods
 
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