To find the volume of the quarter shaped tank you would have to use the volume of the sphere using the equation V=4/3(3.14)r^3. You would substitute the radius of 70 feet into the equation, V=4/3(3.14)(70*70*70). You would multiply the radius 3 times since it's the radius cubed. Once you use a calculator to solve it and you get the answer 1,436,026.67 feet. That's just the volume of the quarter tank so the find the volume of the main tank you would divide 1,436,026.67 by 4
If only one reactant is increased, then the chemical reaction will only produce a certain amount of products after the limiting reagent is used up, and in this experiment, the most mass the reaction could produce was 0.4 grams. Although we kept adding calcium chloride, not adding sodium hydroxide in the same proportions will not yield more product, which is the main goal in conducting this lab. We should have seen a plateau at 0.4 grams to show that the limiting reagent inhibited further Ca(OH)2 production, but we made several mistakes in our experiment, which made the data unusable to conclude. Once again, the data is polluted, so these number are not accurate, but it is the data our group has to work with. The theoretical yield should have been more than the actual yield, and the percentages should have been less than 100.
Because it is a tertiary benzylic halide, the reaction is considered an SN1 type. To test the purity, the class then uses a TLC. When one places,” a spot of the substance on the absorbent surface of the TLC plate, the solvent (or solvents) run up through the absorbent,” (Zubrick223). The initial mass of the reactant, triphenylmethyl chloride was 2.006 grams. The experiment yield is 1.589g, which is a 80.3% yield.
The fifth formula used for the purpose of calculating the grams of copper produced was moles of Cu multiplied by the gram atomic weight of copper over moles of copper. This ended up being used as .0431 moles of Cu* 63.55 grams of Cu/ 1 mole of Cu = 2.740 grams of copper produced. The actual yield of copper is calculated by the baby food jar and copper mass minus the mass of the baby food jar. 97.7070 grams- 94.8280 grams = 2.8791 grams of copper. The percent yield of copper is calculated by the actual yield (value #6) being divided by the theoretical yield of copper (value #5), then multiplied by 100.
My advice is to wean yourself off soda slowly. Soda is like any other addictive substance; it’s hard to quit! Maybe try lessening your consumption of soda from 4 days a week to 3, 2, and hopefully 1, until you reach one soda a month or none at all! Try safe alternatives like sparkling water, natural cane sugar drinks, seltzer, or unsweetened tea. If you are going to take anything away from my presentation let it be this: All sodas have way too much sugar, toxic chemicals, and many consequential health hazards.
3) Centrifuged at 2500 rpm for 12 mins. Upper hexane layer (supernatant) was transferred carefully into another test tube. 4) Evaporated the hexane under a stream of grade 1 nitrogen gas and added 100 µl of methanol to the residue left and vortexed for 1 min. 5) Injected 100 µl of extract in HPLC vials and closed properly. Standard curves and calculations- Retinol was quantified from standard curves peak area for each vitamin.
• Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, 2mM) in phosphate buffer (3.0ml) was taken in an experimental cuvette, followed by the rapid addition of 40μl of enzyme extract and mixed thoroughly. • The time required for a decrease in absorbance by 0.05 units was recorded at 240nm in a spectrophotometer (Genesys 10-S, USA). • The enzyme solution containing H2O2-free phosphate buffer
This is not accurate because it is not one product that is causing these health problems such as diabetes and obesity. Getting rid of just soda will not take away health issues. The soda ban is a bad idea because it limits people's opinions. ¨Ban the Ban!¨ the opinion piece by SidneyAnne Stone quotes, ¨When you take away my option to order a soda a certain size, you have now removed my opinions.¨(Stone pg. 288).
This is a learned bias as people don't know how many regulations your tap water has to pass to be deemed drinkable. The regular population find it hard to trust your town or random stats and facts on the internet, so they remain skeptical. To those who remain skeptical it may surprise you that scientists around the world have tested this and agree, tap water is cleaner than bottled water. “Dr. Gina Solomon, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, told The New York Times that “there is no reason to believe that bottled water is safer than tap water.”(Ban the Bottle) Well known doctors say you shouldn't believe the hype that tap water is worse than bottled water.
On the off chance that this enzyme doesn't work, the microbes can't replicate or repair themselves and this executes them.Nalidixic acid is filtered out of the blood and pass into the urine by the kidneys. Large amounts of the prescription go into the urine, which implies nalidixic acid can be utilized to treat bacterial contaminations in the urinary tract. But as for my practical, we got clearing zone of S.aureus instead of E.coli. Since the inhibition supposed to go to E.coli but maybe due to some technical error like too high concentration of Nalidixic acid when plated on S.aureus compared to E.coli, that is why we got false positive
Furthermore, according to the pie chart created in the data analysis, the sample given contained of the percent by mass for metal to be 5.2%, salt was 3.3%, wood was 3.1%, plastic was 4.5%, rock was 12.5%, sand was 11.8%, and water was 59.6%. Also, the formula used to calculate the percent error was Percent Error=observed value-true valuetrue value*100%. When it came to the results, the calculated percent error was 6.65% for sand, 0.60% for wood,1.57% for plastic, 3.13% for metal,