Which Does A Better Job of Rinsing Out A Glass

  • Thread starter Thread starter chunkytuna21
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Glass Job
AI Thread Summary
Rinsing a glass three times with 50mL of water is more effective than rinsing once with 1L due to better dilution of residue. Each rinse helps to progressively dilute any remaining contents, reducing the likelihood of leftover residue affecting results. The discussion suggests that a mathematical simulation could further illustrate the effectiveness of the multiple rinses. A thin film of water left on the glass surface after rinsing also contributes to the need for multiple rinses to ensure thorough cleaning. Overall, the consensus is that multiple smaller rinses yield better results than a single large rinse.
chunkytuna21
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
When it comes to washing glasses, there is always a little residue left over. Presume for a 100mL glass about 0.50mL is left behind when you pour out the contents. Which will do a better job of rinsing out the glass after the first pour? Rinsing 1 time with 1.000L of water (in a large out container like a sink) or rinsing 3 times with 50mL of water? Show why.


I think it would be rinsing 3 times with 50mL of water. If you only rinse it once with the 1L of water, it is kind of hit or miss. Either you get it all or you don't, but with the 3 separate rinsings you are more likely to get it all or at the very least dilute it enough to prevent the left over contents of the glass from corrupting your data. As for showing why, i was thinking of showing a dilution series for the glass as the 50ml of water is added each time. Does that seem correct? Any suggestions or corrections to my logic are greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes - three times is better. No - it is not hit and miss.

Think this way: there is a thin film of water left on teh glass surface after rinsing. What you do is you dilute it with each rinsing.

--
methods
 
Try to examine this at a very low level, and perform a mathematical simulation. Compare the results between the two 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