You are Here: Home

# Equilibria, Energetics and Elements (F325) - June 2011 Exam. watch

1. soo... the melting of water into ice, was that +, + ?
Ice into water sorry
2. (Original post by kingam)
is there a raw mark ums converter
No, but to get an underestimate just x 1.5
so that if its low you can think that itll be higher as there will be low grade boundaries
3. (Original post by Limesasquatch)
No, but to get an underestimate just x 1.5
so that if its low you can think that itll be higher as there will be low grade boundaries
what ums have you got in all your exams so far lol
4. (Original post by Thuzz)
yeah i got second order
but i messed the rest of the question up
oh well a couple marks for stating the half life and saying it was second order hopefully
So it was second order?
5. (Original post by Dim0nIX)
So it was second order?
Some people are saying second order because of inconsistent half lives while the others are saying first order because of experimental difference or something like that.

I also put second order. We'll just have to wait for what OCR says.
6. there was a link to the paper but its not working anymore does any body else have the copy of the paper that you can send me the link to. thank you.
7. (Original post by Student21)
Some people are saying second order because of inconsistent half lives while the others are saying first order because of experimental difference or something like that.

I also put second order. We'll just have to wait for what OCR says.
I said it was first. It's such a stupid question because it even says in the textbook that we often don't use those graphs because it can be difficult to tell between first and second orders.

8. Enthalpy/entropy was surely + + for ice/water question??
9. (Original post by imperial maniac)
I said it was first. It's such a stupid question because it even says in the textbook that we often don't use those graphs because it can be difficult to tell between first and second orders.

it was quite clearly 1st order as half life was more or less constant. if you look at the graph it took 190s to half first time, but if you look where the crosses are the one nearest is actually slightly more to the right, so it probably is 200s, then it was 400s, and then at just after 600s

if it was 2nd order, it wouldn't have anywhere near a constant half life really.
10. (Original post by wilsea05)
it was quite clearly 1st order as half life was more or less constant. if you look at the graph it took 190s to half first time, but if you look where the crosses are the one nearest is actually slightly more to the right, so it probably is 200s, then it was 400s, and then at just after 600s

if it was 2nd order, it wouldn't have anywhere near a constant half life really.
Well thank the flying spaghetti monster for that.
11. it was first half according to my teacher because remember your interpreting a curve so more or less there abouts, if there was no values everyone would agree the curve is 1st order
12. (Original post by susan23)
ok heres the paper....http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/touran22/f325/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

could someone please tell me how many marks questions:

page 7 of the question paper
page 10 of the veiwing
page 14 of the question paper
page 16 of the question paper
omg when i looked into the paper again it is so much easier=.= .. anyways i have chosen benenecarboxylic acid does anyone think i will get a method mark for it?because i have worked out and the only thing being wrong is that chosen acid is not lactic acid or ethanoic acid.
=.=
i have commented on the temperature in the tounge is different from 25degree C and that these pH which these works might be different hence not able to produce the sweet tang .
13. (Original post by wilsea05)
it was quite clearly 1st order as half life was more or less constant. if you look at the graph it took 190s to half first time, but if you look where the crosses are the one nearest is actually slightly more to the right, so it probably is 200s, then it was 400s, and then at just after 600s

if it was 2nd order, it wouldn't have anywhere near a constant half life really.
Hey we are just discussing it. No need to get too emotional I drew tangents at regular time intervals and plotted a new graph of rate-concentration (wasted lots of time but I wanted to double check). The graph was a curve. That clearly implies second (or third) order. HOWEVER as you said the half-life was almost constant and my curve was only slopping up a little bit. This as many people are saying might be due to experimental error. We were probably expected to think outside the box and assume that half-life is constant (which I think is unfair). I hope that we atleast get some method marks if second order is wrong.
14. (Original post by imperial maniac)
Well thank the flying spaghetti monster for that.
Was it the flying spaghetti monster that enlightened you as to what order the reaction was with his holy appendage?
15. (Original post by PedalBrain)
Enthalpy/entropy was surely + + for ice/water question??
Yep. Solid - liquid Entropy increases. Energy is needed to break the bonds in the lattice (ice) so energy needs to be put in so delta H is +
16. (Original post by Dim0nIX)
Hey we are just discussing it. No need to get too emotional I drew tangents at regular time intervals and plotted a new graph of rate-concentration (wasted lots of time but I wanted to double check). The graph was a curve. That clearly implies second (or third) order. HOWEVER as you said the half-life was almost constant and my curve was only slopping up a little bit. This as many people are saying might be due to experimental error. We were probably expected to think outside the box and assume that half-life is constant (which I think is unfair). I hope that we atleast get some method marks if second order is wrong.
Sorry it is definitely first order. Look into the book again the shape of the curve matches with first order curve as well. If it was to be 2nd order the gradient of the curve would look steeper and hence doesn't match with the book.Also as a physics student i knew that when determining whether the half life is constant it varies by 5 to 10% sometimes.
17. anybody else feel like they have worked their arses of all year to try and get an A, and it has all been wasted because of OCR and MAGIC TANG?!
18. (Original post by Dim0nIX)
Was it the flying spaghetti monster that enlightened you as to what order the reaction was with his holy appendage?
Indeed it was, I was looking at the exam, and his noodly appendage was inserted into my ear, giving me the gift of chemistry enlightenment.
19. (Original post by terry_2006)
Sorry it is definitely first order. Look into the book again the shape of the curve matches with first order curve as well. If it was to be 2nd order the gradient of the curve would look steeper and hence doesn't match with the book.Also as a physics student i knew that when determining whether the half life is constant it varies by 5 to 10% sometimes.
Interesting... I am a physics student as well and that is the first time I hear about variable half-life. In the chemistry book it explicitly said constant half-life implies first order.
20. what was the KOH electrolyte question??
where we were given two pka values and we had to write equations??
what did everyone put?!
xx

### Related university courses

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: December 10, 2012
Today on TSR

How do you think you'll do?

### University open days

Wed, 25 Jul '18
2. University of Buckingham
Wed, 25 Jul '18
3. Bournemouth University
Wed, 1 Aug '18
Poll
Useful resources

Can you help? Study Help unanswered threadsStudy help rules and posting guidelines

## Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE