quick chemistry question

This is a discussion on quick chemistry question within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I'm supposed to write a balanced equation for this: "A solid piece of bismuth is strongly heated in oxygen" I ...

  1. #1
    Pursuing knowledge confuted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,916

    quick chemistry question

    I'm supposed to write a balanced equation for this:

    "A solid piece of bismuth is strongly heated in oxygen"

    I got 4Bi + 5O2 ---> 2Bi2O5 but the girl I'm trying to help with chem doesn't agree. Can someone either tell me I'm right or tell me I'm an idiot? thanks
    Away.

  2. #2
    Registered User axon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,572
    I thought that your equation was wrong, and to verify it had to take out my big ol' chem book, and indeed, the proper equation is

    Bi + O2 = Bi2O3

    remember, it really doesn't have to say "in oxygen",

    axon

    EDIT:: just to double check if I was right I typed thedescription of the reaction in google, here are a couple of the results from the first page:

    result 1 problem 7

    here look at answer (g)

    EDIT 2:: hey confuted, whatever came from the CD experiment? did you get any good data? did you even do it?
    Last edited by axon; 10-27-2003 at 09:57 PM.

    some entropy with that sink? entropysink.com

    there are two cardinal sins from which all others spring: Impatience and Laziness. - franz kafka

  3. #3
    Pursuing knowledge confuted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,916
    why doesn't Bi have a +5 oxidation number?
    Away.

  4. #4
    Unregistered Leeman_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    753
    The unbalanced equation is Bi + O2 --> Bi2O3

    The balanced equation is 4Bi + 3O2 --> 2Bi2O3

    The most stable oxidation state for bismuth is +3. If it was Bi(V) then you would use the +5 oxidation state. If it was indeed Bi(V) then your equation would be right, but since it's not specified use +3 which is more stable.

  5. #5
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    why doesn't Bi have a +5 oxidation number?
    Heavier elements have larger more diffuse orbitals hence form weaker bonds.

    In order to form 5 bonds (formal oxidation state 5+), electrons in the s orbital need to be promoted to sp hybridised orbitals this takes energy, in lighter elements this is offset by the strongly stabilising effect of forming 2 extra bonds. However for heavier elements like Bismuth the energy required to promote the electrons is greater the the energy released via formation of the extra bonds, so it only forms 3 bonds (formal oxidation state 3+). This is known as the "inert pair effect".

  6. #6
    ___
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    806
    Also your equations coeffecients don't add up. There is supposed to be an equal amount on both sides.
    "When I die I want to pass peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather did, not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car."

  7. #7
    Pursuing knowledge confuted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,916
    Originally posted by ZakkWylde969
    Also your equations coeffecients don't add up. There is supposed to be an equal amount on both sides.
    They added up.

    4Bi + 5O2 ---> 2Bi2O5

    4 Bi ---> 2 Bi2 = 4Bi
    5 O2 = 10 O ---> 2 * O5 = 10 O

    The reason I got it wrong was just that I was using 5 for the oxidation number of Bi. I didn't realize my periodic table had a list of the oxidation numbers, with the most common one in bold (heh, it was kinda late and I was tired)
    Away.

  8. #8
    ¡Amo fútbol!
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,136
    Originally posted by Clyde
    Heavier elements have larger more diffuse orbitals hence form weaker bonds.

    In order to form 5 bonds (formal oxidation state 5+), electrons in the s orbital need to be promoted to sp hybridised orbitals this takes energy, in lighter elements this is offset by the strongly stabilising effect of forming 2 extra bonds. However for heavier elements like Bismuth the energy required to promote the electrons is greater the the energy released via formation of the extra bonds, so it only forms 3 bonds (formal oxidation state 3+). This is known as the "inert pair effect".

    Err... A definate Chem major.

  9. #9
    Registered User axon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,572
    Originally posted by golfinguy4
    Err... A definate Chem major.
    I don't think so...this is all from general college chem 1, as I can remember.

    some entropy with that sink? entropysink.com

    there are two cardinal sins from which all others spring: Impatience and Laziness. - franz kafka

  10. #10
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    I don't think so...this is all from general college chem 1, as I can remember.
    I don't think I covered the inert pair effect pre-uni but its possible, its not complex of itself though I suspect a grasp of terms like "orbitals" and why they get "diffuse" for heavier elements and why them being "diffuse" weakens bonding in this instance (why indeed bond formation is stabilising) will be fairly poor prior to university chemistry.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,708
    clyde is a chemistry major, he's helped me before, I think...

  12. #12
    ¡Amo fútbol!
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,136
    Yea, I know he is. I cheated.

  13. #13
    Unregistered Leeman_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    753
    I'm taking AP Chem at school....redox sucks balls

  14. #14
    Pursuing knowledge confuted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,916
    Originally posted by Leeman_s
    I'm taking AP Chem at school....redox sucks balls
    Functional groups are a lot worse (unless you like memorization)
    Away.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Very quick math question
    By jverkoey in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-27-2005, 12:05 AM
  2. very quick question.
    By Unregistered in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-24-2002, 04:48 AM
  3. quick question
    By Unregistered in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-22-2002, 05:44 AM
  4. Quick Question Regarding Pointers
    By charash in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-04-2002, 12:04 PM
  5. Quick question: exit();
    By Cheeze-It in forum C Programming
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-15-2001, 06:46 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21