Grade

Subject

Type of questions

Chemistry Senior High

化学緩衝液の範囲です。 左に書いてある考え方を読んでも、解答が何を言っているのかがいまいちよくわかりません。 あってるかわかんないですが、矢印を書いたあたりから今何してるんってなります。 なぜ酢酸ナトリウムのmol濃度を出すのですか? 本当に全然わからないので教えてくれたら... Read More

Dutie 発展例題27 緩衝液 11. COOM CH 3000-115 COCH3000-THE Naok Nat+OH- Cl=35.5 Ag=108 →問題 343 0.10mol/Lの酢酸水溶液10.0mL に 0.10mol/Lの水酸化ナトリウム水溶液 5.0mLを 加えて, 緩衝液をつくった。 この溶液のpHを小数第2位まで求めよ。 ただし、酢酸の 電離定数を K=2.7×10mol/L,logio 2.7=0.43 とする。 第Ⅰ章 物質の変化と平衡 考え方 ように 緩衝液中でも,酢酸の電離平へ が成り立つ。混合水溶液中の音 酸分子と酢酸イオンの濃度を求 め、 電離平衡の量的関係を調べ ればよい。 このとき,酢酸イオ ンのモル濃度は,中和で生じた ものと酢酸の電離で生じたもの との合計になる。これらの濃度 を次式へ代入して水素イオン濃 解答 ふつうにいれたかつ 残ったCH3COOH のモル濃度は, 10.0 0.10x 5.0 mol-0.10x 1000 mol 1000 (15.0/1000) L = 0.0333mol/L 0.10× また, 生じた CH3COONa のモル濃度は 5.0 1000 (15.0/1000) L 混合溶液中の [H+] を x[mol/L] とすると, CH3COOH H+ + CH3COO mol =0.0333mol/L Tom 0.0 度を求め, pHを算出する。され 0.0333 はじめ [H] [CH3COO-] 平衡時 0.0333- 0.0333 [mol/L] 0.0333+x [mol/L] Ka= [CH3COOH] 塩酸のpH H+] = [CH3COOH] -xK₁₂ 0.0333 [CH3COO- xの値は小さいので, 0.0333-x=0.0333,0.0333+x= 0.0333 とみなすと, ②式から [H+] =K』 となるため, pH=-log10 [H+] = -log10 (2.7×10-5)=4.57 →問題 346 347 発展例題28 溶解度積 塩化銀AgCI の溶解度積を8.1×10 -1 (mol/L)として、次の各問いに答えよ。 (1)塩化銀の飽和水溶液1Lには,何gの塩化銀が溶けているか。 07.000 (2)0.10mol/Lの硝酸銀水溶液100mLに、0.10mol/Lの塩化ナトリウム水溶液を 0.20mL加えたとき,塩化銀AgCI の沈殿が生じるかどうかを判断せよ。 |考え方 (1) 塩化銀は,次のように電離する。 AgCI (固) Ag++Cl 溶解度積は Ks = [Ag+] [Cl-] で ある ■解答 HOUHO HOOOHO (1) (1) 飽和水溶液 1L中の塩化銀AgCl (式量143.5) をx [mol] とすると,[Ag+]=[Cl-]=x[mol/L] となる。 溶解度積が8.1×10-11 (mol/L)なので x2=8.1×10-11 x=9.0×10-mol/L

Resolved Answers: 1
English Senior High

赤い下線のところがどういう構造になっているか分からないです、教えてくださいm(_ _)m

moving from " (1) 点) There are historians and others who would like to make a neat division between "historical facts" and "values." The trouble is that values even enter into deciding what count as facts-there is a big leap involved in 'raw data" to a judgement of fact. More important, one finds that the more complex and multi-levelled the history is, and the more important the issues it raises for today, the less it is possible to sustain a fact-value division. But this by no means implies that there has simply to be a conflict of prejudices and biases, as the data are manipulated to suit one worldview or another. What it does mean is that the self of the historian is an important factor. The historian is shaped by experiences, contexts, norms, values, and beliefs. When dealing with history, especially the sort of history that is of most significance in philosophy, that shaping is bound to be relevant. As far as possible it needs to be articulated and open to discussion. The best historians are well aware of this. They are alert to many dimensions of bias and to the endless (and therefore endlessly discussable) significance of their own horizons and presuppositions. A great deal can of course be learned from those who do not share our presuppositions. Our capacity to make wise, well-supported judgements in matters of historical fact and significance can only be formed over years of discussion with others, many of whom have very different horizons from our own. It is possible to I have a 12-year-old chess champion or mathematical or musical genius, but it is unimaginable that the world's greatest expert on Socrates could be that age. The difficulty is not just one of the time to assimilate information; it is (2)

Resolved Answers: 1