TYRONEEZEKIEL Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 In chemistry, chemicals can be synthesized by exchanging the ions of chemicals to form new ones. for instance. sodium perchlorate + ammonium chloride -> sodium chloride + ammonium perchlorate.potassium benzoate + copper sulfate -> copper benzoate + potassium sulfateI understand this concept, as the reactivity series shows that sodium is much more reactive in contrast to the ammonium. If that being said, then why doesnt the reaction work backwards? That leads me to believe that there is a reactivity series or a rule for the non-metallic side of the chemical.(Anion?) So how does one figure when a reaction will happen or not?
Ralph Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 these are equilibrium reactions the ones we chose are the ones which have a very high skew to the right this is to do with solubility and not reactivity in lemens terms in the solution there is a whole bunch of copper ions potassium ions and sulphate ions when they get close to gether (an anion with a cation) they attract each other but are than separated by the water again when an insoluble compound is formed the water cant break it apart again and it falls out of solution
Mumbles Posted September 20, 2009 Posted September 20, 2009 The activity series you mention is only applicable to the lone metals in terms of replacement reactions, not their salts, although there are trends. IE Aluminum in a solution of copper sulfate will make aluminum sulfate and copper metal, but it doesn't work backwards. It's just one of those chemical intuition things that will grow over time. You could probably make decisions by entropy.
TYRONEEZEKIEL Posted September 22, 2009 Author Posted September 22, 2009 Ok, so its just something I have to memorize... which chemical will react with which chemical
Mumbles Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Not so much memorize, but you'll learn trends. After a while, you'll be able to look at an unknown chemical, and have a rough idea how to make it, use it, and it's incompatibilities/precautions. I don't really even know how to suggest you go about learning that. Looking through a few more chemistry based pyro books, and maybe an inorganic chemistry text or two will do you well though. Shimizu, Hardt, and Shidlovskii would be good pyro books with a more scientific/chemstry basis. I can try to find a good inorganic text if you're interested.
TYRONEEZEKIEL Posted September 23, 2009 Author Posted September 23, 2009 Absolutely mumbles! I would greatly appreciate any chemical literature. I'd like to get a head start, as that is what I would like to major in.
Mumbles Posted September 23, 2009 Posted September 23, 2009 Since this is kind of inorganic stuff, I'll stick with that. It's a superior field anyway . I have the following two: http://www.amazon.com/Inorganic-Chemistry-...TF8&s=books http://www.amazon.com/Descriptive-Inorgani...TF8&s=books I like them both. The second is easier to read, and is less indepth in mathematics. I think it is more useful for understanding the elements, how they react, and some good basic synthesis. The first book is more about bonding, symmetry, and reactivity. It is far more indepth, and you'll get a good theoretical understanding, and be able to predict and understand a lot of things. I'd go with the 2nd book over the first as an introduction. It's hard to understand a lot of stuff in Miessler without a basis in inorganic chem. Really any general chem text book will have a lot of good info if you don't want to jump into inorganic chem. You need a general foundation in chemistry to understand inorganic. Then there is the bible of inorganic chemistry:http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Inorganic-C...ntt_at_ep_dpi_2
TYRONEEZEKIEL Posted September 23, 2009 Author Posted September 23, 2009 What exactly is the difference between inorganic and organic chemistry? Carbon?
Ralph Posted September 23, 2009 Posted September 23, 2009 organic chemistry is all about carbon and carbon chains and their bonding with hydrogen (things like graphite and diamond are generally not considered as organic) inorganic is everything elce
Mumbles Posted September 23, 2009 Posted September 23, 2009 I don't like Ralph's description. Inorganic is soundly filled with carbon-carbon bonds of all sorts. The definition I prefer is "Inorganic chemistry is the chemistry of all elements". Organic chemistry is just a specialized subset of Inorganic.
Ralph Posted September 24, 2009 Posted September 24, 2009 i said and its bonding with hydrogen but yeah it isnt a great definition
assaf127 Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Just learn some thermodynamics (really low level), take the standard Gibbs energy for the materials, and calculate.. it's really easy stuff.
Ttalos Posted October 13, 2009 Posted October 13, 2009 I would have to agree. While you can use solubility rules (which come from trends) to determine if a reaction will occur it is much more useful to use the Gibbs energy. If you can figure up the Gibbs energy you should also have the skill to calculate the Enthalpy as well. This will let you know whether or not the reaction is exothermic and how much energy will be released if it is. This gives you the info needed to plan safety accordingly. Hint: find any college chem text and look up Hess's Law regardsTtalos Just learn some thermodynamics (really low level), take the standard Gibbs energy for the materials, and calculate.. it's really easy stuff.
Recommended Posts