XPFMember
XPRS Moderator
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 13,287
- Points
- 523
That's not allowed on the forum..(asking about what's coming) so better be careful..!ThankU and bst ov luk 2 u as well my p3 for chem is tday any idea whats coming
We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)
That's not allowed on the forum..(asking about what's coming) so better be careful..!ThankU and bst ov luk 2 u as well my p3 for chem is tday any idea whats coming
the calculation one!!th calculation one or there was one questio like combustion and formation or combustion like that which one?
and yeah ofcourse ionization will be plus as energy REQUIRED to remove electron
HARD
actually i dont remeber whether it was - or + as for as i remeber what ever answer i got i worte that like you had to do 3 times combustion of carbon and 3 times combustion of hydrogen and all that is equal to i think combustion of ethanal or whatever that was + the formation valuse we had to find then you make thr formation value as the subject youll get the answer i just wrote that dirsctly i dont remember whether that was - or + you did same right??the calculation one!!
YES IONIZATION IS AN ENDOTHERMIC REACTION CUZ U R PUTTING IN ENERGY TO REMOVE THE ELECTRON.seriously ???? ionisation energy is endothermic so it must be +
i just used that values not multiplying with the factor 3 and using the formula for formation=products-reactantsactually i dont remeber whether it was - or + as for as i remeber what ever answer i got i worte that like you had to do 3 times combustion of carbon and 3 times combustion of hydrogen and all that is equal to i think combustion of ethanal or whatever that was + the formation valuse we had to find then you make thr formation value as the subject youll get the answer i just wrote that dirsctly i dont remember whether that was - or + you did same right??
but when yo u balance the equation werent there 3 carbon and ydrogen cumbustion how can there be one carbon and hydrogen combustioni just used that values not multiplying with the factor 3 and using the formula for formation=products-reactants
i dont even rember soory it was 3 or 2 but i remember there i multiplied it not like how you did because there was option of 2 only i rember like 2 values where same in the 4 choices only the sign was different in the same valuesi just used that values not multiplying with the factor 3 and using the formula for formation=products-reactants
iam not sure whether it was negative or positive but i remeber i had same answer as yours 1105 but my sign would have been negative as well if yours right because obviously because you dont change sign after calculation its like you get it by calculation-1105 because it was enthalpy change of formation is always negative
high temp and low pressurecan i ask what u guys got for the conditions for a gas to be ideal
and the equilibrium equation pls
i forgot the equilibrium which did they say has x moles and wich 2 all that?high temp and low pressure
2P <-> 2Q + R
q has 2moles at the beginning and r has x moles in equlibriumi forgot the equilibrium which did they say has x moles and wich 2 all that?
i forgot the equilibrium which did they say has x moles and wich 2 all that?
and at eqbm. the total moles were 2 + xq has 2moles at the beginning and r has x moles in equlibrium
this was option b ryt?high temp and low pressure
2P <-> 2Q + R
yeah as far as i remember..it was Bthis was option b ryt?
yeahhhhhyeah as far as i remember..it was B
For almost 10 years, the site XtremePapers has been trying very hard to serve its users.
However, we are now struggling to cover its operational costs due to unforeseen circumstances. If we helped you in any way, kindly contribute and be the part of this effort. No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted.
Click here to Donate Now