From a long-time watcher, I cannot thank you enough for all of your videos and resources Jesse. I am so grateful that you have provided such accessible and high quality GAMSAT prep material and I appreciate how organised, succinct and informative it is. Thanks so much, keep up the amazing work!
Thanks so much, Grace! It means a lot to see that you're really taking a lot out of the videos on the channel in your GAMSAT prep. I appreciate the support! :)
After year 12 chemistry, and two semesters of chemistry in first year uni, I finally understand the rate laws, reaction quotients, and reaction constants. Thank you, this is such a relief.
Jesse, you might just be the reason why I pass Section 3! Thank you SO much for creating this comprehensive, yet easy to understand content of all my least favourite chem topics! I'm from a non-science background but did a 1st yr undergrad unit in chem to prepare for the GAMSAT 6mths ago- needed a refresher before tackling MCQs and miraculously came across your channel today. Can't thank you enough for making this so accessible! Much appreciated!
This is so fantastic to read, Kate! This is exactly what I had hoped to achieve in this crash course series, so I'm very glad to hear that it's been helpful. Best of luck with the studies 🙂
Thank you so much for this video! I just found your channel and have been binge watching your videos. I have a background in exercise physiology but am struggling with chemistry, it's been very overwhelming figuring out how to learn all of the basics but your videos have helped so much! So informative and succinct :) I feel like I have a better chance at the GAMSAT. Can't believe you put in all this effort for your subscribers! You definitely deserve more views :) Thanks!
Hello Jesse, Firstly, thank you so much for these videos, they are priceless. Just wanted to ask, once I do all the videos in this Chemistry series, do they basically cover all the foundational knowledge I need for the GAMSAT in terms of chemistry? I.e. I do not really need to go and learn other Chemistry not covered by you? I have a Science degree but have mostly forgotten everything and wanted to refresh myself.
Thank you so much for this content Jesse it is so well explained and succinct. It is so easy to understand from the way you explain it. Thank you for putting such high quality out for free, it goes to show how much you deserve to be a Dr helping others out like this.
Hi Jesse, thank you so much for these videos!! As someone coming from a maths degree but no chem or bio knowledge these have been super useful! I saw your reply to someone else about the des o'neill's prep course - I've noticed that they've stop producing it; do you think it's worth buying second hand off gumtree or using a more recently published one like the acegamsat books? (primarily for the science content / practice questions as this is definitely my weakness)
Hey Anna, so happy to hear that they've been useful! I believe the Des Oneil books are floating around for free on the internet, shoot me an email info@jesseosbourne.com and I can probably help you out. The Des Oneil questions are quite useful and probably the next best material beyond the ACER stuff. I'd steer clear of the Acegamsat books. It's another prep company charging for material that is already freely available and from what I've seen, pretty poorly put together and not a good representation of what to expect in GAMSAT. In terms of prepping content, the stuff I go over in this crash course series as well as my other ones for Physics, Bio, and Maths is a good starting point for the topics to be 'aware' of. You could also extend your understanding with Khan Academy videos or something similar but realistically, practising actively through questions is the best way to develop the right skills for GAMSAT. If you did need more routine practice questions to get to grips with topics, I'd say use the timestamp titles from these videos and dump them into google with 'worksheet pdf' and you'll find plenty of good textbook type questions so that you can get familiar with things. I wouldn't spend a huge amount of time here though, as GAMSAT questions focus much more on adapting to new information and relating these ideas as patterns and rely less on technical calculations. This is where a lot of paid material is often very misleading because the questions are too superficial and don't reflect the real exam. In terms of GAMSAT style questions, you've got the ACER books as the ideal material and then Des (there's about 500 pages of questions) and my sample section 3 questions on my resources page
Just a question regarding rate laws, at 47:41, I'm confused as to how one reactant can be a 1st order and the other a 2nd order. Wouldn't one reactant be a limiting reagant whilst the other is an excess reagant? therefore, wouldn't you expect no change in rate of reaction when increasing 1 reactant (the excess reagant), and a change in rate of reaction when increasing the other reactant (limiting reagant)?
So it sounds like you've got a slight confusion between rate of reaction and the extent of reaction. The rate will be simply how fast reactant is consumed and product is produced whereas extent of reaction refers to amount of product that can be produced/degree of consumption of reactant regardless of how long it takes. Limiting reagents and excess reagents relate to the extent of reaction but not the rate. Increasing the amount of an exisiting excess reagent would not change the extent of reaction (how far it will go) because the limiting reagent is still limiting it, but adding more of that excess reagent may increase its concentration and impact the speed at which the reaction takes place (rate)
thankyou jesse your a great teacher! I really appreciate your free resources. I wanted to ask, I dont have a strong science background, and I am trying to build literacy. My buddy has recommended Des O'neill's gamsatprep red series science revision course, is this a good place to start? It feels like the learning curve on this material is super steep?
Hey Olly! The Des stuff is the next best resource after ACER material but if you're sitting in March this year, I'd say you're best sticking to ACER stuff first as it is still the most reflective of the actual exam, regardless of the fact that it has been shortened and moved to computer screens. The downside to the Des stuff is that it assumes a lot more theory/content knowledge than the actual GAMSAT (often expecting knowledge of physics formulae and chemistry concepts) which can make it difficult to adjust to if from a non or minimal science background. If you're prepping for September, I'd say the best way to work through material would be ACER (for context and a baseline), then Des questions (to consolidate and extend your knowledge of the theory and practice time management) and then back to ACER in the final weeks (to refamiliarise yourself with the structure of ACER questions and common tricks and pitfalls) The stuff I run through here in my crash courses really is the extent of the knowledge (sometimes more than) that you'll need to navigate the content aspect of GAMSAT questions. Most of the time, the stems provide the bulk of the information you use and then might lean on some foundational scientific principle (eg. concentration gradients, Le Chatelier's principle, Weight force = mg) Best of luck!
@@jesseosbourne Thankyou Jesse I really appreciate your advice! Helping out a pleb like myself 😂 I am sitting for the first time in September. Time to start crunching questions! I am not expecting much for my first sitting, but I am still going to give it my best shot! Thankyou again for your work here, it makes going through this process feel alot less lonely.
Hey Shimaa! Yep, I'd say working through these crash course videos first is a good start. I design them so that they give a very quick, GAMSAT focussed overview of the relevant content that is worth practising and being 'familiar' with. This should help in you rounding up all the necessary topics and defining the boundaries of what you need to know. You might also want to use other video series to help round out your knowledge or get alternative explanations (Khan Academy would probably be my recommendation) From there though, I'd recommend working through ACER material (untimed) to start to get familiar with the way that these concepts are assessed and then use good old google to help fill gaps where you feel you need more experience and knowledge. My biggest recommendation for errors as a result of a lack of familiarity would be to do uni/highschool level worksheets on trickier topics and then return to the ACER material. This can help in drilling the skills and the 'way to think' in chemistry. I've also got a study guide for NSBs video that might be helpful to you, where I explain how to use ACER material in your study effectively th-cam.com/video/2FQwKdohNso/w-d-xo.html Ultimately, with the theory of chemistry, you don't need to know the entire syllabus of a first year uni course. I'd say I probably rely on a lot of fundamentals of chemistry that I learned in highschool chemistry and less than 10% of what I learned in university. Being familiar with the language and the algebra (stoichiometry) of chemistry is helpful but you don't need to understand how specific chemistry experiments work or the details of a specific chemical reaction or equation because they'll always introduce these concepts in the stem. Being familiar enough that you're not having to rely on 'learning' from the stem in test conditions is what you are really aiming for in most situations. Best of luck!
hi jesse, quick question, Do you have a video on how to work between fractions anf decimals. Like how do I quickly convert 1/6 mole to 0.7 moles without a calculator.
I don't think I have a video on this specifically, it might have been demonstrated in some of he walkthrough videos where it comes up. But for reference here are a couple of methods you can use to convert from fraction to decimal format: 1. Estimation based on simpler fractions. using 'easier' denominators on either side of the denominator you have as reference points. For example 1/6 is between 1/5 (0.2) and 1/10 (0.1). But because 6 is closer to 5, the answer should be between 0.2 and 0.1 but closer to 0.2 hence 0.17ish The fractions that are most useful to know would be 1/2 = 0.5, 1/3 = 0.33, 1/4 = 0.25, 1/5 = 0.2, 1/8 = 0.125, 1/10 = 0.1, 1/20 = 0.05, 1/25 = 0.04, 1/50 = 0.02 You can usually work with these to make good estimates in most cases and probably end up more accurate than needed for the question. You might also notice the reciprocal relationship between the denominators and their decimal pair in the above cases. eg. 1/4 = 0.25 and 1/25. = 0.04. This can also be handy in recalling these basic fraction values 2. You can round off the numbers to simpler values but try to stay within 10% of their actual value (I explain a little more about this in my 10% rule video). So if you had something trickier like 17/23 you could round it to 20/25 = 4/5 = 4 lots of 1/5 = 4 x 0.2 = 0.8ish The important thing with this is that when rounding, you want to either round both up or both down so that the rounding effect somewhat cancels out and keeps your estimate accurate. Here I rounded 17 up to 20 and 23 up to 25. If you wanted to really get into the technicalities of what's happening, I have rounded 17 up by 3 (18%) and 23 up to by 2 (9%). Because my numerator was scaled up by a larger %, I can expect that the answer I got was a slight overestimation in this case and in choosing an answer option I might choose something a bit below 0.8 and definitely not above 0.8. So even though I'm estimating, I'm still able to draw concrete conclusions that are useful in deduction. I also broke my 10% rule in this one but I'd let it slide because the 18% is being offset by the 9%. Don't stress about the whole % thing though, that's just for the sake of explanation here but not something you'd want to be mentally tracking in the exam You could imagine that if I were to round the numerator up and the denominator down, I'd get an exaggerated overestimation and likewise an underestimation for the reverse. 3. You can always revert back to old school long division with borrowing! 1/6 can be set up on paper as 6|⎺1 (hopefully that janky representation is kinda clear). Asking yourself "how many 6's go into 1?" "zero" so you write a zero at the top and then the decimal point, carry the one over to make 10 and ask "how many 6's go into 10?" "One with 4 remaining" so you write 1 above and the 4 carries to the next zero to make 40 and so on. It is tedious but it'll give you an exact answer when you're unsure of how to estimate accurately. I've used it a lot in my own sittings. You could practice these each day for 10-15 minutes until you feel comfortable and confident with your speed and accuracy. If you haven't already checked out ChatGPT, I'd recommend it for giving you randomised problems like this. Just ask it to give you 10 random fractions and then you can work through estimating them and then checking your accuracy with a calculator. If you're within 10% of the answer, you're good! Hope this helps!
Hey Tharika, it is something I'd like to work on in the future but it is a big undertaking that will take a lot of time that I don't currently have. Also, as someone who is still in the application process, it's also a bit of a grey area in terms of ACER policy and their ability to void results so I'm just playing it safe and working with my own content :)
Hey Armand! So what we're doing here is testing for the proportionality between the concentration of the reactant and the rate itself. Because doubling the concentration of B lead to a doubling of the rate it gives a linear relationship, hence the power to B is 1. If we had say tripled concentration from 0.2 to 0.6, then we would see the rate triple as well. If we doubled the concentration and it quadrupled the rate then this would imply a squared relationship and the power of B would then be 2 and so on
No worries. Yes, so the reason for this is because we are trying to determine the order of the relationship between the concentration of each reactant and the overall rate. Notice that by multiplying [B] by 2 this gave a multiple of the rate of 2. This means that there was a proportional change as a result. Similarly, if we tripled the [B] then this should triple the rate in this case. This is why the power (y) is 1. With the value of x we multiplied [A] by 2 but the rate multiplied by 4 meaning there was a squared relationship between [A] and rate (ie. 2^2 = 4). This means that if we tripled [A] we would expect the rate to be 3^2 = 9 times greater Hopefully this helps clear things up :)
Technically you can do long division of 1 ÷ 6 to get the recurring decimal 0.16666... But I wouldn't actually bother with that in the exam, approximating 1/6 ~ 1/5 = 0.2 might be a little easier and will work just as well given its MCQs
From a long-time watcher, I cannot thank you enough for all of your videos and resources Jesse. I am so grateful that you have provided such accessible and high quality GAMSAT prep material and I appreciate how organised, succinct and informative it is. Thanks so much, keep up the amazing work!
Thanks so much, Grace! It means a lot to see that you're really taking a lot out of the videos on the channel in your GAMSAT prep. I appreciate the support! :)
you, my friend, are an absolute champion
After year 12 chemistry, and two semesters of chemistry in first year uni, I finally understand the rate laws, reaction quotients, and reaction constants. Thank you, this is such a relief.
Haven't done this since first year chem a while ago, this was a lifesaver jogging my memory! thanks again Jesse :)))
Awesome, no worries! :)
Jesse, you might just be the reason why I pass Section 3! Thank you SO much for creating this comprehensive, yet easy to understand content of all my least favourite chem topics! I'm from a non-science background but did a 1st yr undergrad unit in chem to prepare for the GAMSAT 6mths ago- needed a refresher before tackling MCQs and miraculously came across your channel today. Can't thank you enough for making this so accessible! Much appreciated!
This is so fantastic to read, Kate! This is exactly what I had hoped to achieve in this crash course series, so I'm very glad to hear that it's been helpful. Best of luck with the studies 🙂
Thank you so much for this video! I just found your channel and have been binge watching your videos. I have a background in exercise physiology but am struggling with chemistry, it's been very overwhelming figuring out how to learn all of the basics but your videos have helped so much! So informative and succinct :) I feel like I have a better chance at the GAMSAT. Can't believe you put in all this effort for your subscribers! You definitely deserve more views :) Thanks!
Really fantastic to hear! Glad they’re helping. All the best with the preparation :)
Thanks so much for taking the time to do this. Very much appreciated!
This is so good to see. Wish I had these videos back when I did the GAMSAT.
Thanks Melissa! Ah well, it sounds like you've been able to put GAMSAT well and truly behind you now anyway haha
@@jesseosbourne Yes, I'm grateful that I don't have to do that again. Best of luck to anyone sitting it in the future!
Thank you again for the resources! So well explained and helpful
Thank you So much for all summary. I have strong chemistry background but i needed something for quick revision and this helped me a lot. Thank you
Hello Jesse,
Firstly, thank you so much for these videos, they are priceless. Just wanted to ask, once I do all the videos in this Chemistry series, do they basically cover all the foundational knowledge I need for the GAMSAT in terms of chemistry? I.e. I do not really need to go and learn other Chemistry not covered by you? I have a Science degree but have mostly forgotten everything and wanted to refresh myself.
thank you so much for these videos Jess they are beyond helpful, really appreciate them!!!!!!
Fantastic, glad they’re useful! :) thanks for watching
tysm for these videos :) really helpful and informative 😄
Thank you so much for this content Jesse it is so well explained and succinct. It is so easy to understand from the way you explain it. Thank you for putting such high quality out for free, it goes to show how much you deserve to be a Dr helping others out like this.
Thank you so much for the feedback! Really awesome to hear its having such an impact. Best of luck!
Thank you Jesse for everything All the best for March 2022!!
Thanks mate! Same to you :)
Amazing thank you!
Thankyou so much this is a LIFESAVER
Great to hear! :)
I really appreciate for the content. I just can't thank you enough!!
No problem at all, Rizna! Glad it was helpful :)
Loving these videos. Thanks so much!
Thanks for the feedback, Jessie! Great to hear this :)
Subscribed!! You are an amazing guy
Thanks for subscribing!
Hi Jesse, thank you so much for these videos!! As someone coming from a maths degree but no chem or bio knowledge these have been super useful!
I saw your reply to someone else about the des o'neill's prep course - I've noticed that they've stop producing it; do you think it's worth buying second hand off gumtree or using a more recently published one like the acegamsat books? (primarily for the science content / practice questions as this is definitely my weakness)
Hey Anna, so happy to hear that they've been useful!
I believe the Des Oneil books are floating around for free on the internet, shoot me an email info@jesseosbourne.com and I can probably help you out. The Des Oneil questions are quite useful and probably the next best material beyond the ACER stuff.
I'd steer clear of the Acegamsat books. It's another prep company charging for material that is already freely available and from what I've seen, pretty poorly put together and not a good representation of what to expect in GAMSAT. In terms of prepping content, the stuff I go over in this crash course series as well as my other ones for Physics, Bio, and Maths is a good starting point for the topics to be 'aware' of. You could also extend your understanding with Khan Academy videos or something similar but realistically, practising actively through questions is the best way to develop the right skills for GAMSAT.
If you did need more routine practice questions to get to grips with topics, I'd say use the timestamp titles from these videos and dump them into google with 'worksheet pdf' and you'll find plenty of good textbook type questions so that you can get familiar with things. I wouldn't spend a huge amount of time here though, as GAMSAT questions focus much more on adapting to new information and relating these ideas as patterns and rely less on technical calculations. This is where a lot of paid material is often very misleading because the questions are too superficial and don't reflect the real exam.
In terms of GAMSAT style questions, you've got the ACER books as the ideal material and then Des (there's about 500 pages of questions) and my sample section 3 questions on my resources page
Thank you legend!!
thank you so much.
Not a problem!
Thank you so much for doing this!!! :-)
Glad it’s helping!
Thank you great video! :)
Just a question regarding rate laws,
at 47:41, I'm confused as to how one reactant can be a 1st order and the other a 2nd order. Wouldn't one reactant be a limiting reagant whilst the other is an excess reagant? therefore, wouldn't you expect no change in rate of reaction when increasing 1 reactant (the excess reagant), and a change in rate of reaction when increasing the other reactant (limiting reagant)?
So it sounds like you've got a slight confusion between rate of reaction and the extent of reaction. The rate will be simply how fast reactant is consumed and product is produced whereas extent of reaction refers to amount of product that can be produced/degree of consumption of reactant regardless of how long it takes.
Limiting reagents and excess reagents relate to the extent of reaction but not the rate. Increasing the amount of an exisiting excess reagent would not change the extent of reaction (how far it will go) because the limiting reagent is still limiting it, but adding more of that excess reagent may increase its concentration and impact the speed at which the reaction takes place (rate)
thankyou jesse your a great teacher! I really appreciate your free resources. I wanted to ask, I dont have a strong science background, and I am trying to build literacy. My buddy has recommended Des O'neill's gamsatprep red series science revision course, is this a good place to start? It feels like the learning curve on this material is super steep?
Hey Olly! The Des stuff is the next best resource after ACER material but if you're sitting in March this year, I'd say you're best sticking to ACER stuff first as it is still the most reflective of the actual exam, regardless of the fact that it has been shortened and moved to computer screens.
The downside to the Des stuff is that it assumes a lot more theory/content knowledge than the actual GAMSAT (often expecting knowledge of physics formulae and chemistry concepts) which can make it difficult to adjust to if from a non or minimal science background.
If you're prepping for September, I'd say the best way to work through material would be ACER (for context and a baseline), then Des questions (to consolidate and extend your knowledge of the theory and practice time management) and then back to ACER in the final weeks (to refamiliarise yourself with the structure of ACER questions and common tricks and pitfalls)
The stuff I run through here in my crash courses really is the extent of the knowledge (sometimes more than) that you'll need to navigate the content aspect of GAMSAT questions. Most of the time, the stems provide the bulk of the information you use and then might lean on some foundational scientific principle (eg. concentration gradients, Le Chatelier's principle, Weight force = mg)
Best of luck!
@@jesseosbourne Thankyou Jesse I really appreciate your advice! Helping out a pleb like myself 😂 I am sitting for the first time in September. Time to start crunching questions! I am not expecting much for my first sitting, but I am still going to give it my best shot! Thankyou again for your work here, it makes going through this process feel alot less lonely.
Hey Jesse, thanks so much for this. If I'm starting chemistry from scratch, is this what you recommend I start with? Or what do you recommend?
Hey Shimaa! Yep, I'd say working through these crash course videos first is a good start. I design them so that they give a very quick, GAMSAT focussed overview of the relevant content that is worth practising and being 'familiar' with. This should help in you rounding up all the necessary topics and defining the boundaries of what you need to know. You might also want to use other video series to help round out your knowledge or get alternative explanations (Khan Academy would probably be my recommendation)
From there though, I'd recommend working through ACER material (untimed) to start to get familiar with the way that these concepts are assessed and then use good old google to help fill gaps where you feel you need more experience and knowledge. My biggest recommendation for errors as a result of a lack of familiarity would be to do uni/highschool level worksheets on trickier topics and then return to the ACER material. This can help in drilling the skills and the 'way to think' in chemistry.
I've also got a study guide for NSBs video that might be helpful to you, where I explain how to use ACER material in your study effectively
th-cam.com/video/2FQwKdohNso/w-d-xo.html
Ultimately, with the theory of chemistry, you don't need to know the entire syllabus of a first year uni course. I'd say I probably rely on a lot of fundamentals of chemistry that I learned in highschool chemistry and less than 10% of what I learned in university. Being familiar with the language and the algebra (stoichiometry) of chemistry is helpful but you don't need to understand how specific chemistry experiments work or the details of a specific chemical reaction or equation because they'll always introduce these concepts in the stem. Being familiar enough that you're not having to rely on 'learning' from the stem in test conditions is what you are really aiming for in most situations.
Best of luck!
hi jesse, quick question, Do you have a video on how to work between fractions anf decimals. Like how do I quickly convert 1/6 mole to 0.7 moles without a calculator.
I don't think I have a video on this specifically, it might have been demonstrated in some of he walkthrough videos where it comes up. But for reference here are a couple of methods you can use to convert from fraction to decimal format:
1. Estimation based on simpler fractions. using 'easier' denominators on either side of the denominator you have as reference points. For example 1/6 is between 1/5 (0.2) and 1/10 (0.1). But because 6 is closer to 5, the answer should be between 0.2 and 0.1 but closer to 0.2 hence 0.17ish
The fractions that are most useful to know would be 1/2 = 0.5, 1/3 = 0.33, 1/4 = 0.25, 1/5 = 0.2, 1/8 = 0.125, 1/10 = 0.1, 1/20 = 0.05, 1/25 = 0.04, 1/50 = 0.02
You can usually work with these to make good estimates in most cases and probably end up more accurate than needed for the question. You might also notice the reciprocal relationship between the denominators and their decimal pair in the above cases. eg. 1/4 = 0.25 and 1/25. = 0.04. This can also be handy in recalling these basic fraction values
2. You can round off the numbers to simpler values but try to stay within 10% of their actual value (I explain a little more about this in my 10% rule video). So if you had something trickier like 17/23 you could round it to 20/25 = 4/5 = 4 lots of 1/5 = 4 x 0.2 = 0.8ish
The important thing with this is that when rounding, you want to either round both up or both down so that the rounding effect somewhat cancels out and keeps your estimate accurate. Here I rounded 17 up to 20 and 23 up to 25.
If you wanted to really get into the technicalities of what's happening, I have rounded 17 up by 3 (18%) and 23 up to by 2 (9%). Because my numerator was scaled up by a larger %, I can expect that the answer I got was a slight overestimation in this case and in choosing an answer option I might choose something a bit below 0.8 and definitely not above 0.8.
So even though I'm estimating, I'm still able to draw concrete conclusions that are useful in deduction. I also broke my 10% rule in this one but I'd let it slide because the 18% is being offset by the 9%. Don't stress about the whole % thing though, that's just for the sake of explanation here but not something you'd want to be mentally tracking in the exam
You could imagine that if I were to round the numerator up and the denominator down, I'd get an exaggerated overestimation and likewise an underestimation for the reverse.
3. You can always revert back to old school long division with borrowing! 1/6 can be set up on paper as 6|⎺1 (hopefully that janky representation is kinda clear). Asking yourself "how many 6's go into 1?" "zero" so you write a zero at the top and then the decimal point, carry the one over to make 10 and ask "how many 6's go into 10?" "One with 4 remaining" so you write 1 above and the 4 carries to the next zero to make 40 and so on. It is tedious but it'll give you an exact answer when you're unsure of how to estimate accurately. I've used it a lot in my own sittings.
You could practice these each day for 10-15 minutes until you feel comfortable and confident with your speed and accuracy. If you haven't already checked out ChatGPT, I'd recommend it for giving you randomised problems like this. Just ask it to give you 10 random fractions and then you can work through estimating them and then checking your accuracy with a calculator. If you're within 10% of the answer, you're good!
Hope this helps!
Can you plz do gamsat practise tests worked solutions?
Hey Tharika, it is something I'd like to work on in the future but it is a big undertaking that will take a lot of time that I don't currently have. Also, as someone who is still in the application process, it's also a bit of a grey area in terms of ACER policy and their ability to void results so I'm just playing it safe and working with my own content :)
@@jesseosbourne That` ok then. Thnx anyaway Jess for what you have done so far. Great content especially crash course videos. Really appreciate.
Thank you sm
and I thank you!
you're welcome!
Hi Jesse,
For the rate laws, how come it is B to the power of 1 when the rate of B doubled from 0.2 to 0.4? Thank you
Hey Armand! So what we're doing here is testing for the proportionality between the concentration of the reactant and the rate itself. Because doubling the concentration of B lead to a doubling of the rate it gives a linear relationship, hence the power to B is 1. If we had say tripled concentration from 0.2 to 0.6, then we would see the rate triple as well.
If we doubled the concentration and it quadrupled the rate then this would imply a squared relationship and the power of B would then be 2 and so on
@@jesseosbourne Thanks Jesse!!
Hi Jeses, thanks for the video, but can I ask why the y is not 2 but 1 in the last question and x is not 4 but 2?
No worries. Yes, so the reason for this is because we are trying to determine the order of the relationship between the concentration of each reactant and the overall rate. Notice that by multiplying [B] by 2 this gave a multiple of the rate of 2. This means that there was a proportional change as a result. Similarly, if we tripled the [B] then this should triple the rate in this case. This is why the power (y) is 1.
With the value of x we multiplied [A] by 2 but the rate multiplied by 4 meaning there was a squared relationship between [A] and rate (ie. 2^2 = 4). This means that if we tripled [A] we would expect the rate to be 3^2 = 9 times greater
Hopefully this helps clear things up :)
How did you get from 1 over 6 to 0.17 mol.? I just can’t understand it
Technically you can do long division of 1 ÷ 6 to get the recurring decimal 0.16666... But I wouldn't actually bother with that in the exam, approximating 1/6 ~ 1/5 = 0.2 might be a little easier and will work just as well given its MCQs
So you're gonna be a doctor right?
That's the plan at the moment!
@@jesseosbourne so where are you in the process at the current time?