What is the Process of Heating a Hydrocarbon in the Presence of Silicates?

AI Thread Summary
The process of heating a hydrocarbon in the presence of silicates is known as cracking. This method typically involves breaking down larger alkane molecules into smaller alkanes, alkenes, and hydrogen. It is often applied to the naphtha fraction obtained from crude oil. Unlike combustion, this process does not produce carbon dioxide. Cracking is essential for producing valuable smaller hydrocarbons from heavier crude oil fractions.
Taryn
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
1. I have a relatively simple question, but I can't think of the answer.
A high bp hydrocarbon (X) is obtained by the fractional distillation of crude oil. (X) is then heated in the presence of silicate materials. only 3 new hydrocarbons were from this proces.


All I want to know is what is this process called?


We thought maybe a combustion but somehow we don't think that's right coz no CO2 is prodced.

Any help would be awesome thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
this is called cracking. it is usually done with the naphta fraction. the large alkane molecules break down into smaller alkanes and alkenes molecules and even hydrogen.
 
cheers for that! :)
 
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