wanabe

Classical physics have many rules that the majority of the educated population know(high school), these rules are steadfast. Quantum physics have many rules that the majority of the educated population do not know(college degree), I among them. Are the rules for quantum as steadfast? I have heard that they are random by some accounts; my suspicion is that they are simply more complex, not random. How do the two types compare(in their respective strictness in their rules?)?

It's important to note that it's how we use Google that changes our brains, just using Google alone does not change your brain, its how one chooses to employ it. People can choose to read the sites they search with Google, as they would read a text book. Bottom line: we remember things that stir emotion & things that were interested in, and of course we can utilize memorization techniques to reduce dependency on external sources of information. Ironically, they can be searched for and found using Google.

from post #1 Mr Rayon The community of science that interprets this development are not traditional scientists. They do so with psychologists and specialized statisticians therefore it is not exact. The interpretation is qualitative. Anytime some thing is qualitative it is also subjective. I would imagine that people see marriage as a stable platform with which to procreate, it is not the only way however. The important question is what is a persons purpose for marriage; Is it to: procreate, have pleasure sex, for money, for love.... I personally don't think that this is necessarily a problem, the jury is still out on what these groups of people will do. maybe people in this group decided there are more important things than marriage. statement of bias: I my self do not object to being married.

The Problems: The following pictures are my work for the problems(in order) Thank you for your time.

um somehow yes... is this about molecules or the elements(ions) that make them up can i simply always balance the elements(ions) and be correct? after much strife: the balanced eqn is 3Mn{2+}+ 4OH{-}+2MnO4{-} >5MnO2+2H2O which means that the above mole ratio in the unit line eqn is 3:2 so carrying out the calculations one gets "0.10274 M" yay!

Yes, but also it's oxidized?... chat?

I'm reduced to guessing... How can the one product be two things? That's my trouble with this.

2H+ +Mn2+ +2MnO4-+e- > 3MnO2 + 2OH- ??????????????????????????????????????????????? Is there any way we could meet on the chat?

Do I have it balanced now (The most bottom formula)? ok never mind... I'm lost as to how to balance this. That was my attempt, I know there are supposed to be H^+ ions on one side and H_2O on another but it's just going to mess up the eqn as far as I can tell...

May I instead direct your attention here

Question #1 The concentration of Mn^2+(aq) can be determined by titration with MnO_4^-(aq) in basic solution. A 22.50 mL sample of Mn^2+(aq) requires 38.28 mL of 4.026×10−2 M KMnO_4(aq) for its titration. Mn^2+ + MnO_4^- > MnO_2(s) (not balanced)...I think the balanced eqn simply needs "2MnO_2" on the product side...My set up is this...38.28mL KMnO_4(1L/1000mL)(4.026*10^-2/1L)(1molMn^2+/1mol KMnO_4)(1/22.50mL)(1000mL)=0.0698495868 M Mn^2+...I've also tried a 1/2 mole ratio didn't work either... Question #2 The titration of 4.90 mL of a saturated solution of sodium oxalate, Na_2C_2O_4, at 25 deg C requires 28.0 mL of 2.100×10−2 M KMnO_4 in acidic solution. What mass of Na_2C_2O_4 in grams would be present in 1.00L of this saturated solution?...Na_2C_2O_4+KMnO_4> Na_2MnO_4+KC_2O_4(my attempt at balancing eqn)...28.0ml KMnO_4(1L/1000mL)(2.100*10^-2/1L)(1molNa_2C_2O_4/1molKMnO_4)(133.9988g/1mol)=0.0787912944g Na_2C_2O_4 Question #3 A solution is to be standardized by titration KMnO_4(aq) against As_2O_3(s). A 0.1012 g sample of As_2O_3 requires 23.60 mL of the KMnO_4(aq) for its titration. 5As_2O_3 + 4MnO_4^- + 9H_2O + 12H^+ > 10H_3AsO_4 + 4Mn^2+. (how nice it's balanced)...What is the molarity of the KMnO_4}(aq)?.....I tried....0.1012As_2O_3(1mol/197.8415)(4mol MnO_4^-/5mol As_2O_3)(1/23.60mL)(1000mL/1L)=0.01733968088M(I'm lost on this one, I'm 99%sure its not right). Thanks in advance.

A series of problems that I am stuck on, not even knowing where to start.(with the exception of #1 i did actually solve)...

Here is what I have. 0.786gCu(1L/42.62)(1000mL/1L)=18.442mL Cu/42.62*100=43.2707% Cu-100=56.729%Cl 0.432707 Cu / 63.546amu Cu*42.62=0.29021=1 mol Cu 0.56729 Cl / 35.453 amu Cl *42.62=0.68197 =2 mol Cl (i chose to multiply by 42.62 instead of 100 because thats the grams of the sample not 100g) CuCl_2, but thats not right!? Well i got desperate (time constraint)and put CuCl_3 as a guess, and got it right, but i still want to know whats up. Thanks.

Have you attempted a "unit line equation" aka "dimensional analysis"? let's see your setup.

Thats all the information I'm given(I can't assume the charge?)...In any case i came up with: (46.62gCuCl/1L)(1L/1mol)(1000mL/1L)(0.786gCu/49.6mL)= a totally bogus 738g Cu??? the 1mol was never used... Then I tried 0.786gCu(1L/42.62)(1000mL/1L)(?/49.6mL)=? I can't just assume some kind of Cu_xCl_y combo can I; and use that atomic mass?

So I'm stuck. I don't know what to do if I don't have the formula for the copper chloride... The table of information just makes it more confusing, because I don't know if i should average the values out or what...it all seems so ambiguous to me. Help please.

13.4 g C_6H_12 O_6(1mol C_6H_12 O_6/180.15768g C_6H_12 O_6)(6 mol O/1 mol C)(3 mol N/6 mol 0)=0.2231378646 mol N !!!!!!!!!!!!!(not 0.233 but) Thank you cypress! I just needed a little socratic questioning. Ug, just that one last step, how annoying. hahaha 105.3% hw grade for me!

Well there are 3 N to the 6 O in C_7 H_5 (NO_2)_3.... So... 0.466 mol O(3 mol N/6 mol 0)= 1.398 Mol N? Right? Geez I feel dumb. If that's correct, how can I write that in one unit line equation? what is the proper way to relate the two chemicals? mol O in the one to the mol O in the other?

Determine the number of moles of N atoms in a sample of C_7 H_5 (NO_2)_3 that has the same number of O atoms as 13.4 g C_6H_12 O_6. My first attempt 13.4 g C_6H_12 O_6(1mol C_6H_12 O_6/180.15768g C_6H_12 O_6)(6 mol O/1 mol C)=0.4462757291 mol O... since the values are equal I figured that the N would be the same; wrong! (I know the masses of C_6H_12 O_6 are slightly different) After some time I came up with 13.4 g C_6H_12 O_6(1 mol C_6H_12 O_6/180.1566g)(6 mol O/ C_6H_12 O_6)(6.022*10^23 atm/1 mol O)(3 mol N/6.022*10^23 atm)=1.33|8839672~1.34mol N... That however did not give the right results... Relating the number of atoms seemed strange to me but it seemed suitable for this question, as it reads: "the same number of O atoms". It seemed I could equate the N and O Where have I gone wrong?

Ah yes, thank you. I remember this from bio 100 now! Quite enlightening (sorry, it had to be said).

Photosynthesis, the process by which plants get their energy from sun light. What part(s) of sun light(ex: visible infrared uv... ) do they actually get energy from? How is this done?

Being in much the same position as the op: npbreakthrough, I think it's a chicken and egg scenario as to the exact cause of a black hole. The way we locate black holes by: "light and other forms of energy and matter are permanently trapped inside a black hole, it can never be observed directly. However, a black hole can be detected by the effect of its gravitational field on nearby objects (e.g., if it is orbited by a visible star), during the collapse while it was forming, or by the X rays and radio frequency signals emitted by rapidly swirling matter being pulled into the black hole."(http://answers.encyclopedia.com/question/can-black-hole-observed-81874.html) I think that people have not been as mean as you expected because we all know very little about black holes.