What's the derivation of the 'Kinetic Equation' in Chemical kinetics?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the derivation and understanding of the chemical kinetics formula v = k[A]^m[B]^n, which describes the reaction rate based on the concentrations of reactants A and B. The initial inquiry seeks a rigorous derivation or logical interpretation of this formula, particularly how it relates to reaction orders. It is explained that for first-order reactions, the rate is proportional to the concentration of a single species, while for second-order reactions, the rate depends on the interaction frequency between two species, correlating to the product of their concentrations. The conversation confirms that the formula was initially hypothesized and later validated through experimental evidence.
Ale_Rodo
Messages
32
Reaction score
6
Hi,

I'm following an introduction course to chemistry and I am reviewing the chapter on Chemical kinetics.
It's shown that the reaction speed for a certain component of a general chemical equation such as aA +bB <-> cC + dD , might be expressed as v = k[A]m[ B]m.

I was wondering where it does come from. It's just plain curiosity, I don't really need to know this for the upcoming exam but I would really appreciate if someone could give a rigorous derivation or a 'sense-full' logic interpretation of said formula.

Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
It goes something like this: For a first order reaction involving a single molecular species, the reaction rate has to be proportional to the amount of the species, as represented by its concentration. For a 2nd order reaction, involving interaction of two molecular species, the rate of the reaction depends on the frequency of encounters between the two species, which is proportional to the product of their concentrations.
 
Was the formula first supposed like that and the experimentally proved?
 
Ale_Rodo said:
Was the formula first supposed like that and the experimentally proved?
If I understand your question correctly, then, pretty much yes.
 
Chestermiller said:
If I understand your question correctly, then, pretty much yes.
Fair enough this time, thanks!
 
I caught the tail end of a video about a new application for treating chemical or process waste, which is applied to 'red' mud or contaminated bauxite residue, but the person of interest mention recovering critical minerals from consumer electronics, as well as treating mine tailings and processing ores of rare earth elements. What I found so far is the following: New electrical flash method rapidly purifies red mud into strong ceramics, aluminum feedstock...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
28K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K