Sunday, November 4, 2018

inorganic chemistry - Why is no bromine liberated in the reaction of potassium bromide and concentrated phosphoric acid?


$\ce{KBr}$ reacts with concentrated $\ce{H3PO4}$ to give $\ce{HBr}$ and ($\ce{KH2PO4}$ or $\ce{K3PO4}$) (not sure which one, if someone knows it, please tell).


Why isn't bromine gas liberated?



Answer



Firstly, $\ce{H3PO4}$ is not a strong enough oxidizing agent to remove the electrons from the $\ce{Br-}$ ions in order for them to then form $\ce{Br2}$, which exists as a liquid at room temperature. Assuming we are working at room temperature, using a strong enough oxidizing agent such as $\ce{H2SO4}$ or a more reactive halogen like $\ce{Cl2_{(g)}}$ or $\ce{F2_{(g)}}$ would be enough to oxidize the $\ce{Br-}$ to $\ce{Br2_{(l)}}$.


If we desired to evolve $\ce{Br2_{(g)}}$, we would have to heat $\ce{Br2_{(l)}}$ to its boiling point of $58.8\mathrm{^oC}$ and then continue to supply it with enough heat to vaporize it. As docscience stated, however, some oxidizing reactions might be exothermic enough to vaporize $\ce{Br2_{(l)}}$ itself. In solution this would depend on $[\ce{HBr}]$ as to whether or not the heat evolved is enough to vaporize the $\ce{Br2_{(l)}}$, but in the solid form $\ce{Br2_{(l)}}$ is vaporized instantly in the extremely exothermic reaction of $\ce{KBr}$ with either $\ce{F2_{(g)}}$ or $\ce{Cl2_{(g)}}$.


Saturday, November 3, 2018

acid base - How do I calculate the degree of dissociation in equilibrium?


In my textbook, for calculating the percentage dissociation of $\ce{HF}$ for the given equation: $$\ce{HF + H2O <=> H3O+ + F-}$$


The solution is:


Initial Concentrations $$[\ce{HF}] = 0.08~\mathrm{M}, \: \ce{[H3O+]} = 0, \:\ce{[F- ]}= 0$$ Equilibrium concentrations $$[\ce{HF}] = 0.08~\mathrm{M} - x, \: \ce{[H3O+]} = x, \:\ce{[F- ]}= x$$


I am not able to undestand why $x$ is subtracted from 0.08 and not $cx$ [ where $x$ is the degree of dissociation]


I tried solving the same problem taking $cx$ but not able to get the solution, can anybody explain the difference to me? I have tried asking a similar question earlier too but it is really hard for me to get my head around this concept.




halacha - Compelling arguments to support Techelet



I know a lot of arguments against the wearing Techelet from my research etc. and I would to now hear some arguments for the Techelet. Does anyone have any arguments that support the Techelet?



Answer



Numerous points were made here which need to be answered:


(1) Regarding the reasons we believe that the Murex trunculus is indeed the hillazon of hazal, please see my latest article: http://tekhelet.com/pdf/TekheletThreadsOfReason.pdf


(2) Regarding the Arizal's statement that after the hurban habayit tekhelet is no longer available, please see my article: http://tekhelet.com/pdf/HistoryMesorahNignaz.pdf


(3) Regarding the difference between Kela Ilan (Indigoferra tinctoria) and the Hillazon (the proposed Murex trunculus) - while the dyes today both produce the same color and are both fast to wool, in ancient times the dye processing most probably contributed to a difference in fastness; see http://tekhelet.com/pdf/testability.pdf


(4) Regarding chemicals, we use chemicals and indeed the Gemara itself says chemicals were used. For more on this, see: http://tekhelet.com/pdf/Sammanim1.pdf


(5) Regarding the Kinneret issue: Shlomo Moshe Scheinman (Solutions to Fundamental Problems Regarding Tekhelet) explains that the Kinerret is merely R. Yehuda's attempt to reconcile the fact that Zevulun, who is to be blessed with the hillazon, held that Zevulun’s territory did not get to the Mediterranean; but R. Acha in Zohar rejects this and holds that Zevulun did have Mediterranean access, so there is no need to postulate Kinneret.


How much ascorbate to neutralize one liter of chlorinated tap water?



In Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, tap water is chlorinated. In an Internet forum, someone claims that in 2008 the water had a chlorine concentration of 0,5 - 1mg/l. On the official site of Emalsa, the water provider, I couldn't find any information about chlorine concentration. I tried contacting them online, but the contact form is broken.


In another forum, I read that ascorbic acid (vitamin C) can be used to neutralize the chlorine: My taste buds say it works!


How much ascorbate/l do I need to neutralize the above amount of chlorine?



Answer



This is just a very short explanatory note on the article suggested by Greg E..


The reaction between ascorbic acid and hypochlorous acid is as follows: $$ \ce{C5H5O5CH2OH + HOCl → C5H3O5CH2OH + HCl + H2O}$$ so for 1 mole of hypochlorous acid you need 1 mole of ascorbic acid. This can be recalculated into a mass ratio by the use of their molecular masses:


$$M(\ce{C5H5O5CH2OH})=176\;\text{g/mole}$$ $$M(\ce{HOCl})=52.5\;\text{g/mole}$$ From this we can see that if the molar ratio is $1:1$, the mass ratio is $176:52.5$ which is $3.3:1$ somewhat higher than the article claims.


I am not exactly sure of the reason, it could be that there is some side reaction of ascorbic acid that also removes some additional hypochlorous acid although I wouldn't know which. Perhaps the article is talking about the amount of ascorbic acid you need to get a concentration which you don't taste anymore?


halacha - Does Vegan Certification Have Any Halachic Weight?


There are a number of organizations that offer Vegan Certification for food products; the concept is the same as kosher certification, (though that is the only similarity). Examples would be Vegan.org or vegansociety.org


Do these certifications, in general, or any of them in particular, have any Halachic weight? Can they be trusted to certify, for example, that a processed product is neither dairy nor meaty, or that its ingredients contain no non-kosher animal products, or that a vegetable product contains no insects?





minhag - Covering eyes for Shema


What is the requirement of covering our eyes for Shema? For example, do your eyes need to be closed? Must one cover with their hand? Does it matter which hand is used?



Answer



The Shulchan Aruch 61:5 writes: נוהגין ליתן ידיהם על פניהם בקריאת פסוק ראשון כדי שלא יסתכל בדבר אחר שמונעו מלכוין:


And the Mishna Brurah 17 explains it as: ידיהם - ר"ל יד ימין


The Rivevos Ephraim 4:44:97 brings two ideas one that one takes both hands the left in the right and covers their eyes so they cant see and be disturbed from their kavana. He also brings another way of covering which is to take ones right hand and use his five fingers make a tzura of one of Hashem's names.


In another tshuva of his in 8:564:4 he writes that it seems that one needs to only use one hand(the right one-Mishna Brurah),he also brings from the Arizal that one uses right hand to close ones eyes and the left hold two tziztos.


see the tshuvos inside for all the sources.


The sefer Ishei Yisroel perek 20:5:15-16 brings a few ideas:That the Right hand should be used,and even if one is a lefty they Right hand is still used(Orchos Rabbeinu 1:pg 53:168,and Be'er Moshe 2:1) ,If one is wearing glasses he does not need to take them off rather he can place his hand over them(Oz Nedabru 12:53).



There is a shittah which holds if one doesnt close his eyes rather he looks into the siddur while saying the first passuk because he can concentrate better than its ok (Orach Ne'eman seif 10)


The Ben Ish Chai in Parshas Vaeira 6 holds that the right hand should be used and it should not be removed until one has finished saying Baruch Shem... He writes ...ויסגור עיניו ביד ימינו בפסוק ראשון עד שישלים בשכמל"ו ויש סוד בדבר...


tefilla - Does Maimonides Allow Prayer to Angels?


In his Mishna Commentary to Sanhedrin 10:1 Maimonides lists as his 5th principle the prohibition to pray to an angel even as an intermediary. He counts this in his enumeration of his 13 principles in his Mishne Torah as well (Hil. Tshuva ch. 3).


How then are we to understand his codification in Laws of Tfilla (7:5) of a prayer addressed to angels


וְכָל זְמַן שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא אוֹמֵר קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס הִתְכַּבְּדוּ מְכֻבָּדִים קְדוֹשִׁים מְשָׁרְתֵי עֶלְיוֹן עִזְרוּנִי עִזְרוּנִי שִׁמְרוּנִי שִׁמְרוּנִי הַמְתִּינוּ לִי עַד שֶׁאֶכָּנֵס וְאֵצֵא שֶׁזֶּה דַּרְכָּן שֶׁל בְּנֵי אָדָם. (Other versions of the text include even more prayer).


This formulation is more difficult as he writes elsewhere that the angels that accompany man are his positive and negative inclinations. “It is to the good and the evil inclinations that they refer in their well-known words," Every person is accompanied by two angels, one being on his right side, one on his left." In the Babylonian Gemara (Shabbath 119b), they say distinctly of the two angels that one is good and one bad.” (Moreh Nevuchim 3:22; Friedlander Trans.)



For a similar presentation of the angels that accompany a person, see Hil. Mezuzah 6:13.


Is it permissible to pray to one's inclinations?



Answer



There is indeed at least unnamed but very early Rabbi who believed this prayer to be proof that there's no prohibition of praying to angels. See the responsum published by Simcha Emanuel in Hamayaan, Tishrei 5758. (This article attributes the same responsum to R. Eliezer Rokeach, though this is not necessarily correct).


Also, before answering the question directly, I'll note that Maimonides/Rambam does not believe that Biblical or Talmudic angels are to always be understood as man's inclinations (see the Commentary to Sanhedrin 10:1, for example, where they are intermediaries for prophecy). Just because he offers that explanation of a passage in Shabbos 119b, he wouldn't necessarily believe the same about these "angels".


Actually, there's a huge body of literature regarding what exactly would be problematic, in Maimonides'/Rambam's view, regarding 'praying to' (or making requests of) angels. I can't find a link right now to all of the many (approx. 30) sources that I know of myself. However, there are less sources dealing directly with this particular prayer, and I'll be happy to discuss those answer.




  1. One explanation is that Maimonides/Rambam probably did not have the version of the text that you cite above, but rather a version that lacked the phrase "עזרוני עזרוני" (as testified by the Bodleian MS. Huntington 80, the copy autographed by its great author). Thus, the only problematic two words (which seem like a 'prayer'), would be "שמרוני שמרוני", "protect me". However, R. Yehudah ben Yakar, in his commentary to the Siddur, explains that the phrase should be translated as "wait for me", just as the verse, "ואביו שמר את הדבר". (He recognizes that this renders the next phrase, המתינו לי as redundant, and his response to that issue is merely to not include it). This explanation is also suggested by R. Meir HaMeili of Narbonne (in the book Milchemes Mitzvah, printed in the back of his Sefer HaMeoros on Maseches Berachos)





  2. Rabbeinu Manoach, a very early commentator on the Rambam, writes that this prayer is indeed directed not to angels, but to certain intellectual faculties. By saying this 'prayer' before entering the lavatory, a person is actually reinforcing (to himself) that he shouldn't be fully using his rational faculty while in there (I assume because one is not permitted to study Torah in the bathroom) but at the same time doesn't want to abandon it completely.




  3. Another source that I know of which addresses this issue directly is R. Yaakov Emden in his commentary on the Tur, Mor U-Ketziah (O.C. 3). There, he explains that because he refers to the angels as משרתי עליון, it's clear that he doesn't believe that the angels have any independent agency, but he's speaking to them as emissaries of God. He believes that doing so avoids running afoul of Maimonides' 5th principle, which is merely that is isn't worth requesting anything of angels because they cannot act against God's will; here, a person is merely asking that they perform God's will happily. (See Abarbanel in Rosh Amanah ch. 12, and R. Moshe Feinstein, Iggros Moshe vol 8, O.C. 5:43:6). Personally, I'm not so convinced that Rambam/Maimonides would really be OK with this, especially if his source is the Talmud Yerushalmi 9:1)




  4. R. Asher Weiss discussed this question in a shiur from September 2006 (available here) and said that careful reading of Maimonides in both his Commentary to Sanhedrin as well as in Hil. Teshuvah 3:7 shows that he only prohibits prayer to angels if done as an expression of their status as intermediaries between oneself and God or serves them. However, if one merely "prays" to them to ask them a favor, this is not considered serving the angels in any way and is thus permitted. (However, this still seems to be against the Ramban in his "Toras H' Temimah", R. Yehudah ben Yakar in his commentary to Tachanun, and R. Shimon ben Tzemach Duran in Magen Avos ch. 4)





periodic trends - Comparing radii in lithium, beryllium, magnesium, aluminium and sodium ions

Apparently the of last four, $\ce{Mg^2+}$ is closest in radius to $\ce{Li+}$. Is this true, and if so, why would a whole larger shell ($\ce{...