Practice Problem: Initial Rates and Rate Laws

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
  • To figure out the rate law for a reaction, we have to gather kinetic data. We can't know just by looking at the balanced equation. Let's practice using initial rates data to determine the rate law for a reaction!
    Try all of the general chemistry practice problems: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    General Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
    PATREON► / professordaveexplains
    Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
    Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
    Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
    Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
    Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT

Комментарии • 24

  • @savannahadams2821
    @savannahadams2821 4 года назад +66

    Some days, I just want to give up and change my major. But then I remember Professor Dave's channel exists and that I'm not stupid, it is possible to learn the material. Thanks so much! :)

    • @ivoryas1696
      @ivoryas1696 3 года назад +3

      Savannah Adams
      Nice! Which major are you?

    • @savannahadams2821
      @savannahadams2821 3 года назад +3

      @@ivoryas1696 I'm a biomedical sciences major at my uni :)

    • @opufy
      @opufy 2 года назад +1

      i can relate to this!

  • @shardofkingdoms9816
    @shardofkingdoms9816 3 года назад +5

    Professor Dave explains it in such a way that makes it easy to learn

  • @IvyElizabeth918
    @IvyElizabeth918 Год назад +1

    Thank you, this was great. I did the problem on my own and then watched the remainder of the video.. I had almost everything correct except for the units in the answer for k!

  • @taylorreese6215
    @taylorreese6215 3 года назад +4

    Thanks Professor Dave! THIS HELPED!

  • @michaeltaumoepenu2875
    @michaeltaumoepenu2875 5 лет назад +3

    Appreciate ur hardworking, thanks

  • @adethyamuralidharan1721
    @adethyamuralidharan1721 2 года назад +3

    thank you professor dave ,you are really awesome. I had this doubt for a long time and I got it clarified.

  • @ameilly
    @ameilly 5 лет назад +1

    Just did this in CHM ll Thank you

  • @Yatukih_001
    @Yatukih_001 5 лет назад +2

    Fun explanation by Professor Davs, or Professor William Williams...

  • @brianzar1943
    @brianzar1943 4 месяца назад

    I believe that there is an error in the final calculation of K. In the data we are given the rate of NO loss which is d[NO]/dt. However, The rate of reaction = -1.2 d[NO]/dt and when you calculated K you assumed that the Rate of NO loss (d[NO]/dt) is equal to the rate of the reaction which is not true. Can you please confirm?

  • @ni25cm79
    @ni25cm79 2 года назад

    thankyou

  • @janchristianbailo970
    @janchristianbailo970 3 года назад +1

    hello professor dave! can i use trial3/trial2 instead of trial3/trial1 when getting the x order?

  • @cocogabrielle2005
    @cocogabrielle2005 2 года назад +2

    Got a chem 1820 test...I'm rushing..if ykyk lol

  • @Noone-rm9hu
    @Noone-rm9hu 2 года назад

    But why we put concentration of trial 2 in numerator and of trial 1 in denomenator?
    When i do it oppositely the answer is still the same I've got same order but is it necessary to put trial 2 concentrations in numerator??

  • @cactichris9829
    @cactichris9829 Год назад

    How do I do one with 3 M Collins’s?

  • @shubhneet8082
    @shubhneet8082 3 года назад

    Won't the order for NO be 1 because as NO is multiplied by 1.5,rate is also multiplied by 1.5..but u wrote that it's multiplied by 2.25..i think there's an error here.

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  3 года назад +1

      those are exponents

    • @shubhneet8082
      @shubhneet8082 3 года назад

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains yeah so if the rate increases in the same way as the concentration of NO. Wouldn't the exponent be 1 instead of 2?

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  3 года назад +2

      sorry i misread at first, for NO the increase of rate is equal to the square of the increase of concentration, it's not by 1.5, it's by 2.25

    • @shubhneet8082
      @shubhneet8082 3 года назад +1

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains okay Thankss!

  • @gajjiyadav7271
    @gajjiyadav7271 5 лет назад

    Sir , I can know evolution
    I first

  • @ayushshukla1042
    @ayushshukla1042 5 лет назад

    First