• We need your support!

    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)

Chemistry: Post your doubts here!

Messages
6,392
Reaction score
27,000
Points
698
Sorry for being late even though you( Lucy Black )got it
I will show you my way maybe it will be easier

ii) General formula of ALCOHOLS CnH(2n+1) OH, as magnanimous stated.
We know the ratio of masses C:H:OH will be 12n:1(2n+1):1*(16+1) from the general formula and they should equate to 116.
The 12,1 and (16+1) are the relative atomic masses
12n+2n+1+17=116
14n=98
n=98/14
n=7

Now just replace the n with 7 in the formula
C7H15OH
Nic method
Thanks :D
 
Messages
1,083
Reaction score
2,466
Points
273
Is the second edition of the Cambridge endorsed Chemistry textbook (authors are Dawnie, Norris, David Acaster and maybe someone else) released yet?

Remember, SECOND EDITION - printed 2014, specifically for the new syllabus.
 
Messages
6,392
Reaction score
27,000
Points
698
Messages
603
Reaction score
1,102
Points
153
What's the reason for Sodium and group 1 elements having a low melting point?
Doesn't answer her question. :p
princess Anu:

If by any chance you don't get what I have just wrote, then here is a simpler explanation

As we go down the group, the size of the atoms increases right? Thus the outer valence electron goes farther away from the nucleus (the nucleus is at the center). Metallic bonding involves the attraction between the valence of electrons and the nucleus. Since the valence electrons are farther away, there will be less attraction between the nucleus and the electrons. Kinda like a magnet and a strip of iron. The farther you take the strip from the magnet, the weaker the attraction. Since the attraction is weaker, less energy is required to overcome the forces of attraction.

The suggested answer, while conceptually correct, has not answered the question totally.

It's more of explaining why the melting point of Group I metals decreases down the group rather than why Group I metals on the whole has a low melting point.

To answer the second point, we need to bring in the fact that strength of metallic bonds are proportional to the number of delocalised electrons, and that Group I metals will only provide one electron per atom.

In summary, strength of metallic bond is directly proportional to delocalised electrons and indirectly proportion to atomic radii.
 
Last edited:
Top