What is the Empirical Formula of Vitamin B5 (Niacin)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kelly09
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
AI Thread Summary
Vitamin B5, also known as niacin or nicotinic acid, has a percentage composition of 58.4% carbon, 4.09% hydrogen, 25.99% oxygen, and 11.38% nitrogen. To determine the empirical formula, one can assume a 100g sample of niacin, calculating the mass and moles of each element based on these percentages. The discussion clarifies that niacin is often confused with Vitamin B3, although this does not significantly impact the calculations. The empirical formula can be derived from the mole ratios of the constituent elements. Understanding these calculations is essential for accurately representing the chemical composition of Vitamin B5.
Kelly09
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Vitamin B5 is called niacin or nicotinic acid. Its percentage composition by mass is (58.4% Carbon) (4.09% Hydrogen) (25.99% Oxygen) and (11.38% Nitrogen). What is the empirical formula of vitamin B5?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Assume you have 100g of niacin. From your percentages, what mass of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen do you have? How many moles of each?
 
And Niacin is Vitamin B3, BTW. Minor mistake that won't really affect your problem.
 
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

Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
14K
Replies
2
Views
14K
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top