What Is the Pressure of Methyl Cyanide After 520 Seconds?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the pressure of methyl cyanide after 520 seconds of a first-order reaction involving methyl isocyanide isomerizing to methyl cyanide. The rate constant for the reaction is given as 7.70x10^-4 s^-1 at 500K, with an initial pressure of 25.0 torr. The user initially calculated the pressure of methyl cyanide as 16.75 torr but found a discrepancy with the book's answer of 8.25 torr. Clarification is sought on whether the user mistakenly calculated the pressure for methyl isocyanide instead. The focus remains on resolving the calculation error to determine the correct pressure of methyl cyanide.
Zeitgeist
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


In the gas phase methyl isocyanide (CH3NC) isomerizes to methyl cyanide (CH3CN) in a first order reaction with a rate constant of 7.70x10^-4s^-1 at 500K. An experiment is performed, where 25.0 torr of methyl isocyanide is placed in 23.2L container at 500K.

After 520 seconds, what is the pressure of methyl cyanide?


Homework Equations


ln (P)t/(P)0 = -kt


The Attempt at a Solution


I used the equation above to solve for (P)t, and I got 16.75, but the answer in my book is 8.25 torr, what am I doing wrong here? Please help...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure that you didn't solve for methyl isocyanide?
 
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