MCAT


 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Question 41

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    mcat-prep.com Forum Index -> GS-8 Physical Sciences
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Guest






PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 1:22 am    Post subject: Question 41 Reply with quote

In question 41, I don't understand why the Ka of HF is provided. Were we suppose to use this information to solve the question?
Back to top
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 2176

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boiling point elevation relates to colligative properties which are properties that depend on the number of particles not the type of particles. The number of particles in this problem is dependent on the concentration times the number of particles present after ionization. Sucrose is one molecule and thus does not ionize. KCL and NaI both can ionize into 2 particles each. Mg(NO3)2 can ionize into 3 particles.

The Ka value of HF is provided to underline the fact that HF is a very weak acid. That means that, for the most part, HF acts almost as one particle since soooooooo little of it ionizes (note that the Ka is very, very low).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
yfangl097543



Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There doesn't seem to be a correct answer for 41 listed, so it marks any answer as wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 2176

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The correct answer is B. This has been updated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
harrington5609



Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:24 pm    Post subject: question 41 Reply with quote

Why wouldn't Mg(NO3)2 come before NaI? I see that the concentration of NaI is greater, but Mg(NO3)2 dissociates into 3 solute particles where NaI is only 2. Does concentration predominate over the number of ions? They seem to equally affect the fp depression by the equation delta T = Kf x m x i
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
harrington5609



Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:26 pm    Post subject: question 41 Reply with quote

my apologies. i just read the question over and its bp elevation not fp depression. Same concept but it made my last post sound crazy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
curlybrand4149



Joined: 05 Dec 2009
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand that the more molecules it is dissolved to, the higher the bp elevation. But isn't change in bp dependent on molality and not molarity? Is there a way to convert them - and if so, why don't we?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcat_premed3832



Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 413

PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

molality = moles solute per kg solvent

the solvent is water

so molality = moles solute per 1000 g water

but the density of water is 1 g/ml or 1000 g/ 1000 ml or 1000 g per liter (at 25 oC)

so for water in all but extreme circumstances (high concentrations, non MCAT temps/conditions!) . . .

molarity and molality are very good approximations.


http://chemistry.about.com/od/lecturenotesl3/a/concentration.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    mcat-prep.com Forum Index -> GS-8 Physical Sciences All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
phpBB SEO