Asked by Tracy
Hi;
I'm just wondering, I need to write the dissocation equation for NH3 so that I can get Kb, and I just want to make sure that I am on the write track. I know that when some solids dissociate they just go from say CaCO3 --> CaO + CO2, but for this I'm wondering because it's a base it would be NH3 +H20 --> NH4+ + OH- or if it would still be NH3 --> NH2 + H2 ...
I'm just wondering, I need to write the dissocation equation for NH3 so that I can get Kb, and I just want to make sure that I am on the write track. I know that when some solids dissociate they just go from say CaCO3 --> CaO + CO2, but for this I'm wondering because it's a base it would be NH3 +H20 --> NH4+ + OH- or if it would still be NH3 --> NH2 + H2 ...
Answers
Answered by
DrBob222
There are compounds, such as NaNH2 (sodamide) that have the negative ion, NH2^-) but you are right on track.
NH3 + HOH ==> NH4^+ + OH^-
Do you want to know a little of the history of this? When I took my first chemistry course, we were taught that
NH3 + HOH ==> produced NH4OH, and the NH4OH dissociated as follows:
NH4OH ==> NH4^+ + OH^-. But research has shown now that there is no NH4OH produced and the reaction procedes directly from NH3 to NH4^+ + OH^-. That intermediate of NH4OH was necessary in order to explain by the Arrhenius theory why NH3 was a base; i.e., NH4OH contained an OH part and that was the base. With the Bronsted-Lowry theory, however, no such intermediate is required. I think the Arrhenius theory still is useful; however, most texts now emphasize the Bronsted-Lowry theory initially.
NH3 + HOH ==> NH4^+ + OH^-
Do you want to know a little of the history of this? When I took my first chemistry course, we were taught that
NH3 + HOH ==> produced NH4OH, and the NH4OH dissociated as follows:
NH4OH ==> NH4^+ + OH^-. But research has shown now that there is no NH4OH produced and the reaction procedes directly from NH3 to NH4^+ + OH^-. That intermediate of NH4OH was necessary in order to explain by the Arrhenius theory why NH3 was a base; i.e., NH4OH contained an OH part and that was the base. With the Bronsted-Lowry theory, however, no such intermediate is required. I think the Arrhenius theory still is useful; however, most texts now emphasize the Bronsted-Lowry theory initially.
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.