5.1 First Law of Thermodynamics and Enthalpy | General Chemistry

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 37

  • @verano.violet
    @verano.violet ปีที่แล้ว +19

    In just 10 minutes, You have explained to me what 3 different chemistry lecturers have failed to help me understand. Thank you so much.

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  ปีที่แล้ว +3

      You're welcome - Glad you got the help you needed!

  • @munoss-u
    @munoss-u วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    thank you, mr. superhero of general chem!

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      You're very welcome!

  • @genebelcherskeyboard
    @genebelcherskeyboard 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    god bless you mr clean

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      HA! I don't remember the last time I saw that character in an ad.

  • @michailtimanov1841
    @michailtimanov1841 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Sound and clean explanations! Nice, Chad!

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you liked it!

  • @raeesadhorat2170
    @raeesadhorat2170 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Hands down , you are theee most brilliant lecturer i have ever come across, Bless you and thank you so much

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You're welcome and Thank You.

  • @BOB_VOX
    @BOB_VOX 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Mr. chads, i have a question about enthalpy, so what is it basically and why is it related to q at constant pressure

  • @timothywheeler671
    @timothywheeler671 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    the state function concept could simplify the conservation of energy -> I spent so much time in Physics trying to reason conservative and nonconservative forces (energy that leaves the system)

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hey Timothy! Hope the video helped :)

  • @veselinavolik3002
    @veselinavolik3002 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Hi hi!! thanks so much, these videos are so so amazing!! would u be able to make a video on steady state approximation for rate laws? that would literally be the best thing in the worldddd

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I don't have it on youtube, but you can watch a video here where I derive the Michaelis-Menten equation for enzyme kinetics which has the steady state approximation as its foundation.
      www.chadsprep.com/chads-elementary-biochemistry-videos/4-2a-derivation-of-the-michaelis-menten-equation/
      Hope this helps!

  • @justahugenerd1278
    @justahugenerd1278 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    24:39 got a good laugh out of me haha

  • @francinebissereth5682
    @francinebissereth5682 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    20:50 don't we need to find out the mole, how did you know there was only one o2

    • @Uriakatos
      @Uriakatos 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      the stoichiometric coefficient of the reaction. Essentially, that conversion factor of -572 kJ/1 mol O2 is another way of writing -572 kJ of energy per mole of O2. In other OTHER words, it is saying "there are 572 kJ of energy produced for each mole of Oxygen that is consumed."
      This is simply a true statement based on the chemical reaction and is not subject to how many moles of Oxygen are actually present.

  • @yurimlee296
    @yurimlee296 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    For "What's the enthalpy change when 9g H2O are produced in the reaction above?" problem, if H2O have 1 mole and enthalpy change equal to -286KJ, then can I directly multiply 0.5 mole H2O with -286KJ?

  • @FrontierThesisYU
    @FrontierThesisYU 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I know they're equivalent and that it just depends on convention, but why would my Physics textbook and my MCAT prep books use the equation: "deltaU = Q - W", in which case the work done ON the system is NEGATIVE? Meaning, why use a minus instead of a plus? Seems far less intuitive than the way you teach it.

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Just to be clear we are talking about ΔE = q + w?

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ΔE and ΔU are used interchangeably and both equations are correct... but we have to be clear on what W is: when you see +W we are assuming that work is being done *on* the system (and so adds to the internal energy), when you see -W we are assuming work is being done *by* the system (and so is subtracted from the internal energy). A lot of text books use ΔU = Q - W, but check what the definition of work is in that case. My advice as always is to follow the equation used by your Professor!

    • @FrontierThesisYU
      @FrontierThesisYU 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you! Do you have. Also, do you have videos on isothermal, isobaric, adiabatic, etc. processes, please? @@ChadsPrep

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@FrontierThesisYU In my physics playlist: www.chadsprep.com/chads-general-physics-videos/first-law-of-thermodynamics/

    • @FrontierThesisYU
      @FrontierThesisYU 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank you!!! @@ChadsPrep

  • @alexsheremett3097
    @alexsheremett3097 ปีที่แล้ว

    May I ask you a little question to tell you the truth I didn't understand the real concept at 20: 30 when we were looking for enthalpy change for 3 moles of O2 you said that you can't just multiply Δ H by 3 ... and to get the right result that's what exactly we (you) did Thank you in advance

    • @dj69321
      @dj69321 ปีที่แล้ว

      He said you could actually, but then went on to demonstrate the math, which isn't necessary for this problem but is helpful to understand for more complex scenarios

    • @alexsheremett3097
      @alexsheremett3097 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@dj69321 thanks🙏.... You know it's amazing I studied long time ago chemistry... In French!... For several decades now I didn't understand the core concept of acid base balance and general chemistry in general... Thanks to this guy and after 65 of his lectures I can say now that everything became more clear... At the beginning I started to review some French books but to my big surprise nothing has changed in their program... Stil everything is understandable... Thanks one more time for the feedback

  • @estimatingonediscoveringthree
    @estimatingonediscoveringthree 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Is dna subject to entropy

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Perhaps you mean "Is the existence of DNA a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?" A little bit of a loaded question, but if you looked at a piece of DNA inside one of your cells let's say, then it's production would in no way be a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. However, if you want to ask about not whether a particular existing piece of DNA exists but perhaps how the 1st piece of DNA came into existence or something along those lines, it is not so clear cut. A dogmatic naturalist might say that there is no violation where as a dogmatic theist might claim that there is a violation. I might be willing to say at the very least that the origination of something as complex as DNA is surprising in light of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. That's my diplomatic answer :)

    • @estimatingonediscoveringthree
      @estimatingonediscoveringthree 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ChadsPrep should we expect unmaintained dna to degrade to non-function, like in a virus

    • @estimatingonediscoveringthree
      @estimatingonediscoveringthree 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thank you!

    • @estimatingonediscoveringthree
      @estimatingonediscoveringthree 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@ChadsPrep appreciate all your hard work!!!!

    • @ChadsPrep
      @ChadsPrep  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Perhaps, but that word 'unmaintained' is a little vague. But there are exonucleases and endonucleases that are fairly prevalent that will commonly 'degrade' DNA. But many of these don't require ATP which means they're carrying out processes that are spontaneous and are just speeding them up. So perhaps we might expect DNA to degrade to individual nucleotides or even further over time even without the aid of exo- and endonucleases.

  • @timothywheeler671
    @timothywheeler671 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    s.o to AZ 🇺🇲