[suvin321]

Species for value 70
(35Cl--35Cl)+
Species for value 74
(37Cl--37Cl)+

Guys...what if in this answer you forget to put the '+' charge? will you not gain any marks? thanks

[Mollymod]

I didn't even draw the bonds, just wrote 35Cl+ and 35Cl+ for 70
and 37Cl+ and 37Cl+
I think they'd have to be very picky to discredit you.
Also, do you get working out marks for the working out of the relative atomic mass?
Because I did the significant figures wrong.

[Richee]

(Original post by Freyma)
I can't quite remember, but I think that question specified that it was a "Solid Sodium Oxide." Which would mean that it couldn't have been a peroxide, right?

I Just saw the same thing that you say .It was Solid Sodium Oxide
Agree with you 100%. Lets see when the results comes.

[117r]

(Original post by Richee)
I Just saw the same thing that you say .It was Solid Sodium Oxide
Agree with you 100%. Lets see when the results comes.

It was definitely Na2O2, the numbers didn't add up any other way, sorry!

Sodium peroxide is solid by the way

[Richee]

(Original post by 117r)
It was definitely Na2O2, the numbers didn't add up any other way, sorry!

Sodium peroxide is solid by the way

I didn't say it isn't Na2O2.
I believe your answer is correct. When I was dong the question I felt I'm getting the wrong answer.
good luck

[117r]

(Original post by Richee)
I didn't say it isn't Na2O2.
I believe your answer is correct. When I was dong the question I felt I'm getting the wrong answer.
good luck

Oh right I see! Good luck to you too!

[UniKingg]

My biggest flaw was doubting myself. The question where you had to do 4 structural formula and then 2 display formula's. I think I originally do right, then last second I panicked and switched them round so I think I did 4 display formula's followed by 2 structural. Goodbye 6 marks.

Fortunately I put the most pathetic of crossing outs on them with the hope that a kind examiner may give me the marks. NUMPTY

[Blob2491]

What would 65ish be? Hoping for an A

[pcforster]

(Original post by UniKingg)
My biggest flaw was doubting myself. The question where you had to do 4 structural formula and then 2 display formula's. I think I originally do right, then last second I panicked and switched them round so I think I did 4 display formula's followed by 2 structural. Goodbye 6 marks.

Fortunately I put the most pathetic of crossing outs on them with the hope that a kind examiner may give me the marks. NUMPTY

No as long as you still drew the correct structural or displayed formula, it doesn't matter what formula they ask you for and what ever formula you draw, the mark scheme always says 'allow correct displayed/structural formula', so as long as it was the correct formula, it doesn't matter what way you draw it (displayed, structural, molecular). SO you probably got most of those 6 marks if not all of them.

[007Shella]

(Original post by suvin321)
Species for value 70
(35Cl--35Cl)+
Species for value 74
(37Cl--37Cl)+

Guys...what if in this answer you forget to put the '+' charge? will you not gain any marks? thanks

I'm not sure... I did the same thing.... But it makes sense to me NOW... because they would go undetected if they're not ions =|

[Akbar2k7]

(Original post by suvin321)
Species for value 70
(35Cl--35Cl)+
Species for value 74
(37Cl--37Cl)+

Guys...what if in this answer you forget to put the '+' charge? will you not gain any marks? thanks

(Original post by 007Shella)
I'm not sure... I did the same thing.... But it makes sense to me NOW... because they would go undetected if they're not ions =|

I think we will get the marks cause in most past papers you dont need to be explicit about them being ionic. As long as you show you understand the isotope combinations you should get the mark.

I made this error too

[007Shella]

(Original post by Akbar2k7)
I think we will get the marks cause in most past papers you dont need to be explicit about them being ionic. As long as you show you understand the isotope combinations you should get the mark.

I made this error too

Hopefullyy....... (Inshallah)

[arnab]

(Original post by 117r)
It was definitely Na2O2, the numbers didn't add up any other way, sorry!

Sodium peroxide is solid by the way

it could also be 2NaO

[arnab]

(Original post by This Honest)
I said that we don't know when combustion is complete, we don't know when methane had completely burned in oxygen.

]
the answer was because there were always some co2 produced........it was in a past paper in the previous spec

[Future Medics]

(Original post by arnab)
it could also be 2NaO

Brother, it asked for the molecular formula for '78' or something
Na0 (23+16) = 39
Times by 2
You get: Na202

[quintillion]

(Original post by arnab)
]
the answer was because there were always some co2 produced........it was in a past paper in the previous spec

I wrote the same thing

[arnab]

(Original post by Future Medics)
Brother, it asked for the molecular formula for '78' or something
Na0 (23+16) = 39
Times by 2
You get: Na202

2NaO = 2Na + 2O

Therefore > Mr of 2Na = 23*2 = 46
Mr of 2O = 16*2 = 32

46+32 = 78

Na2O2 is the same as 2NaO, at least in terms of molecular mass.......

[117r]

(Original post by arnab)
it could also be 2NaO

Not the molecular formula, no

[Future Medics]

(Original post by arnab)
2NaO = 2Na + 2O

Therefore > Mr of 2Na = 23*2 = 46
Mr of 2O = 16*2 = 32

46+32 = 78

Na2O2 is the same as 2NaO, at least in terms of molecular mass.......

YEAH MASS ... BUT it asked for MOLECULAR FORMULA (I'm not sure)...

But your mass is correct, maybe you'll get the mark

xoxoxoxoxoxoxox

[James A]

(Original post by This Honest)
Took the words out of my mouth
I found A2 slightly easier and more enjoyable than AS

sorry, had to find your quote somewhere, erm, clear some of your inbox space so i can send you a pm about it!