General Thoughts: Chemistry (1 Viewer)

[tomdoml]

This. Why specify one but not the other?

My thoughts exactly. If II is not specified, then you have no more reason to assume that it's I than II. They need to give you the charge, valence whatever for transition metals.

 

[sandshoes23]

yeah because a neutralisation reaction is always exothermic

 

[Hayzazz]

I'm sure both will be accepted. It's BOS's fault for not being clear enough.

 

[khorne]

My thoughts exactly. If II is not specified, then you have no more reason that it's I than II. They need to give you the charge, valence whatever for transition metals.

(I) is not specified, but (II) is, that is why. The lowesr valence state is the one which is not specified generally.

 

[tomdoml]

(I) is not specified, but (II) is, that is why. The lowesr valence state is the one which is not specified generally.

Don't think you can assume the valence is I just because I is a smaller number. If they don't provide it there's not much you can do but guess the valence. That said in the absence of a valence provided I can guarantee most people would have picked II since its the most common valence of copper ions (that we've worked with anyway).

 

[khorne]

Don't think you can assume the valence is I just because I is a smaller number. If they don't provide it there's not much you can do but guess the valence. That said in the absence of a valence provided I can guarantee most people would have picked II since its the most common valence of copper ions (that we've worked with anyway).

does not explain why Ni (II) was used but Cu was not specified. I dare say they'd accept both, but it's still silly.

 

[norez]

Goodbye band 6.

Exactly :'(

 

[snorelacks]

For those "outline the procedure you would undertake at a school laboratory to test for.." questions, was it necessary to write out a whole experiment (including accuracy, validity etc) or can it be brief explanation?

 

[khorne]

For those "outline the procedure you would undertake at a school laboratory to test for.." questions, was it necessary to write out a whole experiment (including accuracy, validity etc) or can it be brief explanation?

OUTLINE the PROCEDURE. lol. Come on m8

 

[Nympha]

For those "outline the procedure you would undertake at a school laboratory to test for.." questions, was it necessary to write out a whole experiment (including accuracy, validity etc) or can it be brief explanation?

I don't think you'd need the whole experiment - it said PROCEDURE to undertake. It was also only 2 marks, so it's doubtful you'd need to have included accuracy/validity to gain full marks.

 

[Psychoanalytic]

Multiple choice was reasonable. I compared my answers with others and I think I got 18/20 which I'd be very happy with.
My option was Shipwrecks which was relatively easy except for the aluminium tray method of cleaning silver cutlery question. I'll be lucky if i get 2/4 for that question. Very lucky.

Short answer I'm unsure of how I did.The calculations I thought were quite difficult especially the titration calculations. I forgot that the acid was triprotic etc.
There was a lot about water quality testing which i wasn't expecting, but thankfully, i learnt my shit.

In the equilibrium question, was the third step in equilibrium or not? I do not remember :S and i wrote about it as if it were in equilibrium. The other two steps I believe I wrote the right thing, talking about pressure, compromised temperature and the removal of products etc.

I'm really hoping I got about 80 -90 raw.
I think I lost 2 (maybe 3) marks in MC, 2 - 4 marks option, 2 marks in equilibrium question and 2 - 3 marks calculations. The rest I think went well in.

 

[Carl5]

For the question about why add barium sulfate, I said that it would turn the solution to a whitish colour and make it easier to see the colour changes in the indicator. Is that even remotely correct?

 

[lolcakes52]

Multiple choice was reasonable. I compared my answers with others and I think I got 18/20 which I'd be very happy with.
My option was Shipwrecks which was relatively easy except for the aluminium tray method of cleaning silver cutlery question. I'll be lucky if i get 2/4 for that question. Very lucky.

Short answer I'm unsure of how I did.The calculations I thought were quite difficult especially the titration calculations. I forgot that the acid was triprotic etc.
There was a lot about water quality testing which i wasn't expecting, but thankfully, i learnt my shit.

In the equilibrium question, was the third step in equilibrium or not? I do not remember :S and i wrote about it as if it were in equilibrium. The other two steps I believe I wrote the right thing, talking about pressure, compromised temperature and the removal of products etc.

I'm really hoping I got about 80 -90 raw.
I think I lost 2 (maybe 3) marks in MC, 2 - 4 marks option, 2 marks in equilibrium question and 2 - 3 marks calculations. The rest I think went well in.

The 3rd step was not in equilibrium. I also thought i went well in the exam, 19/20 or 20/20 in multiple choice and near full marks in the main and option. Easily over 85, probs low to high 90's. I finished with a full 45 minutes and that was taking the exam slowly.

 

[lolcakes52]

For the question about why add barium sulfate, I said that it would turn the solution to a whitish colour and make it easier to see the colour changes in the indicator. Is that even remotely correct?

Yes, that seems to be the right anwser.

 

[Nympha]

For the question about why add barium sulfate, I said that it would turn the solution to a whitish colour and make it easier to see the colour changes in the indicator. Is that even remotely correct?

This has been answered in previous pages. However, to answer your question.. yes

 

[Awkward_Ninja]

Hated the chem exam.
Even harder than my trial, which was still pretty damn hard.
Multiple choice was the best part of it. Everything afterwards screwed me over.
50 at worst, and maybe 60-something at best for a raw. Hoping and praying and crossing all my fingers and toes that my rank and scaling will kick it up to an alright mark.

 

[Vng93]

Re: Chem How HARD!!

hopefully 75/100 hehe

 

[Username2]

Re: Chem How HARD!!

Whats everyone's thoughts on making up a random nuclear equation (one that was clearly wrong) in order to illustrate a principle?

 

[lolcakes52]

Re: Chem How HARD!!

Whats everyone's thoughts on making up a random nuclear equation (one that was clearly wrong) in order to illustrate a principle?

Bad, why would they give a mark for a wrong piece of information.

 

[khorne]

Re: Chem How HARD!!

Whats everyone's thoughts on making up a random nuclear equation (one that was clearly wrong) in order to illustrate a principle?

In what sense? If you say, collided two ions, as long as it made a transuranic element, that is fine.