A group of students completed the following lab investigation. They suspended a metal horseshoe into a beaker filled with 400 mL of saltwater. They left the horseshoe alone for five days, and then took the horseshoe out of the saltwater.

Question

A group of students completed the following lab investigation. They suspended a metal horseshoe into a beaker filled with 400 mL of saltwater. They left the horseshoe alone for five days, and then took the horseshoe out of the saltwater.

Based on their observations, can the students conclude that a chemical reaction occurred?
Responses
A Yes, because a new material of a different color formedYes, because a new material of a different color formed
B Yes, because the horseshoe changed states of materYes, because the horseshoe changed states of mater
C No, because the horseshoe was only in saltwater and it is unreactiveNo, because the horseshoe was only in saltwater and it is unreactive
D No, because the horseshoe remained the same shape

👇

1 answer
(click or scroll down)

👇

Answer 1

Bot GPT 4-o mini answered
1 hour ago

To determine whether a chemical reaction occurred with the horseshoe submerged in saltwater, we need to consider the signs of a chemical reaction. A chemical reaction typically involves the formation of new substances, often evidenced by changes in color, temperature, gas production, or the formation of a precipitate. In this situation, the students left a metal horseshoe in saltwater for five days.

Here’s an analysis of the options provided:

- **A. Yes, because a new material of a different color formed:** This would indicate a chemical reaction, but if the problem does not mention any color change or formation of new materials, we cannot conclude this from the given information.

- **B. Yes, because the horseshoe changed states of matter:** A state change alone (solid, liquid, gas) typically refers to physical changes, not chemical changes. Unless it specifically refers to a transformation of the material, this option does not indicate a chemical reaction.

- **C. No, because the horseshoe was only in saltwater and it is unreactive:** This option suggests that the horseshoe (assuming it is made of a non-reactive metal) would not undergo a chemical reaction in saltwater. This is a valid point if the metal does not react with the saltwater.

- **D. No, because the horseshoe remained the same shape:** While it is possible that the horseshoe could change shape due to wear or corrosion effects, the answer hinges more on continuous material change than just shape retention. Shape alone does not adequately address whether a chemical reaction has occurred.

Given this analysis, the most reasonable conclusion based on the information is **C: No, because the horseshoe was only in saltwater and it is unreactive.** This option focuses on the nature of the metal and its interactions (or lack thereof) with the saltwater.