If there is one mole of AlCl3, then there is one mole of Al and 3 moles of ClI know it's a little late but I've been thinking, with your method aren't we only finding the number of moles of aluminium chloride? How are we actually finding the number of moles of aluminium?
What I was asking was a little ambiguous - I didn't necessarily mean the actual number of Aluminium moles in the compound but how many Aluminium moles are in 0.374g of AlCl3 so yes I am referring to the mass.Actually i think i would just say its in a ratio of 1-3, because you need only 1 mole of al to 3 moles of cl but having said that are you referring specifically to the mass as well?
I'm fairly sure that it's not...What I was asking was a little ambiguous - I didn't necessarily mean the actual number of Aluminium moles in the compound but how many Aluminium moles are in 0.374g of AlCl3 so yes I am referring to the mass.
I just don't understand how you are able to attain the same answer for aluminium as if you were finding the number of moles of sodium chloride because:
Number of moles = Mass/Molar mass
= 0.374/133.5
= 2.80 x 10^-3 mol
Why is this the same for aluminium?
From what I interpreted from the question:What I was asking was a little ambiguous - I didn't necessarily mean the actual number of Aluminium moles in the compound but how many Aluminium moles are in 0.374g of AlCl3 so yes I am referring to the mass.
I just don't understand how you are able to attain the same answer for aluminium as if you were finding the number of moles of sodium chloride because:
Number of moles = Mass/Molar mass
= 0.374/133.5
= 2.80 x 10^-3 mol
Why is this the same for aluminium?
Do you mean how there is 1 AlCl3 molecule and 1 Al atom or that they have the same number of molecules and atoms?From what I interpreted from the question:
Find the number of moles in AlCl3
2.80 x 10^-3
By definition of a mole, one mole has the avagadro's constant amount of particles in it.
Hence the number of molecules of AlCl3
How many atoms of Al is there? Well for every one molecule of AlCl3, there is 1 Al atom, hence there are the same number of AlCl3 molecules as there are Al atoms.
Likewise there are 3 times as many Cl atoms as AlCl3 molecules
Hence there are k Al atoms in AlCl3, (3k for Cl)
Divide by Avogadro's constant again to obtain the number of moles. This is why there are the same amount of moles of Al and AlCl3. (which is what I think you were asking?)
In our given amount of substance, in this substance if there is an 'n' number of AlCl3 molecules, since there is only 1 Al atom for every 1 AlCl3 molecule because this Al atom is PART of the AlCl3 molecule itself, therefore there must be an 'n' number of Al atoms.Do you mean how there is 1 AlCl3 molecule and 1 Al atom or that they have the same number of molecules and atoms?
You're answering what I was asking but I hoped for a simpler way (I understand it though) - Much like someth1ng's method. I don't know how he knew what particular values to choose to attain the number of moles of aluminium. He just plugged in the mass and molar mass of AlCl3 but it doesn't make sense to me :/
What you're doing make sense and I understand. Would this method be legit though? (im new to this)there's 0.374g of AlCl3, convert that into moles (in this case there is no option but to use the formula n=m/mw, unless ur crazy haha)
now if u look at the ratio of Al:Cl, it's 1:3 ; so basically in every 1 mol of aluminium chloride, there's one mole of aluminium, 3 moles of chlorine, right?
so if we find that there are 2.8 x 10^-3 moles of AlCl3 in 0.374 g, then there are also 2.8 x 10^-3 moles of aluminium and (2.8 x 10^-3) x 3 moles of chlorine
but, of course, you're only asking for moles aluminium so the answer should be 2.8 x 10^-3 due to the mole ratios in the actual empirical formula of aluminium chloride
KEEP IN MIND: this should only work if the formula is an empirical formula.
this is what i would do, however i'm also just a student and could be wrong, don't judge me haha
Looking more for an answer like this. Makes sense, thanksHe means that larger atoms have more electrons, so the metal cations formed by metallic bonding thus form stronger charged ions, and thus reject each ther more strongly I think? Something like that I'm sure
ftfyHe means that larger atoms have more electrons, so the metal cations formed by metallic bonding thus form stronger charged ions, and thus reject each ther more strongly I think? Something like that I'm sure, DUH!
http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Theoretical_Chemistry/Chemical_Bonding/Metalic_BondingBonding Characteristics
The strength of a metallic bond depends on three things:
1) The number of electrons that become delocalized from the metal
2) The charge of the cation (metal).
3) The size of the cation.
A strong metallic bond will be the result of more delocalized electrons, which causes the effective nuclear charge on electrons on the cation to increase, in effect making the size of the cation smaller. Metallic bonds are strong and require a great deal of energy to break, and therefore metals have high melting and boiling points.
A metallic bonding theory must explain how so much bonding can occur with such few electrons (since metals are located on the left side of the periodic table and do not have many electrons in their valence shells). The theory must also account for all of a metal's unique chemical and physical properties.
Haha nah, I think it's fine atm, not really worth looking further into. Thanks for your contribution I'll check the link out soon.http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Theoretical_Chemistry/Chemical_Bonding/Metalic_Bonding
I really wouldn't bother taking this further unless you plan on learning some quantum chemistry beforehand. A truly valid answer would likely involve a lot of this, solid-state chemistry and who knows what else.
Edit: I have no idea how the first point correlates with position on the periodic table. The second and third characteristics are tied up with the first so that's a bit of a dead end as well.