CHRIS25
National Hazard
Posts: 951
Registered: 6-4-2012
Location: Ireland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Concentrated tannic acid
Just need to make sure about my basics here, am I correct in saying that 1.7 mol is a concentrated Tannic acid solution?
I divided 2850g/L by 1701g/mol?
Thankyou.
‘Calcination… is such a Separation of Bodies by Fire, as makes ‘em easily reducible into Powder; and for that reason ‘tis call’d by some
Chymical Pulverization.’ (John Friend, Chymical Lectures London, 1712)
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. (William Penn 1644-1718)
The very nature of Random, Chance development precludes the existence of Order - strange that our organic and inorganic world is so well defined by
precision and law. (me)
|
|
|
Hexavalent
International Hazard
Posts: 1564
Registered: 29-12-2011
Location: Wales, UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: Pericyclic
|
|
Assuming your numbers themselves are correct, then yes.
"Success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." Winston Churchill
|
|
|
CHRIS25
National Hazard
Posts: 951
Registered: 6-4-2012
Location: Ireland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thankyou.
‘Calcination… is such a Separation of Bodies by Fire, as makes ‘em easily reducible into Powder; and for that reason ‘tis call’d by some
Chymical Pulverization.’ (John Friend, Chymical Lectures London, 1712)
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. (William Penn 1644-1718)
The very nature of Random, Chance development precludes the existence of Order - strange that our organic and inorganic world is so well defined by
precision and law. (me)
|
|
|
Nicodem
Super Moderator
Posts: 4230
Registered: 28-12-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
It is wrong, but not because of the calculation. It's because the concentration of tannic acid can not be given in mol/L units due to it is not being
a compound or mixture of isomers (only these can be represented with mol and mol/L units). For this reason, tannic acid does not have a defined
empirical formula and no defined molecular mass.
PS: You should not believe every crap you read on Wikipedia unless you check its references first.
…there is a human touch of the cultist “believer” in every theorist that he must struggle against as being
unworthy of the scientist. Some of the greatest men of science have publicly repudiated a theory which earlier they hotly defended. In this lies their
scientific temper, not in the scientific defense of the theory. - Weston La Barre (Ghost Dance, 1972)
Read the The ScienceMadness Guidelines!
|
|
|
bbartlog
International Hazard
Posts: 1139
Registered: 27-8-2009
Location: Unmoored in time
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The first two paragraphs in the wikipedia article on tannic acid are actually pretty good... it's the sidebar information that is misleading.
I should further add that the solubility figure given there (assuming it is even correct in any context) is meant to say that 2850g of tannic acid
will dissolve in one liter of water. This however will not give you a 1.7M solution since the resulting liquid will occupy a volume greater than one
liter.
The less you bet, the more you lose when you win.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
