Sulphuric Acid Experiment

The data table provided below obtained melting point data for crude product, pure product, and mixture of the pure and 4-tert-butylbenzyl. 12. The TLC data obtained is provided in a table below. The TLC data was conducted solely in a 9:1 hexane/ethyl acetate solvent solution as opposed to the 1:1 and pure hexane solution as well. This was due to the lack of time, but as explained in number 7, a very polar solvent (1:1 solution) or non-polar solvent (pure hexane) is not ideal when obtaining

Additionally, while changing the receiver from cyclohexane to toluene there was a loss of distillate which also led to the errors observed in the data. Furthermore, if more data were collected for each compound it would be a better representation of the experiment's results. If these errors were avoided, then the experiment would be more efficient in distilling the two compounds from each other and the plateau would be as sharp as figure 6 in the lab

Also the cans we have used are highly reliable as it were all the same temperature and contained the same amount of liquid inside them. The pavement we have used is not as reliable since we could not have seen which marks were which soda which may mean we might mistake a mark for another soda and measure it incorrectly. Our variables are likely yo be correct compared to what our research question was and the tools we have used is also

The results were expected, since a difference in the odors of the enantiomers was detected, and the polarimeter showed that the two enantiomers rotated light to about the same degree in opposite directions. In the polarimetry experiment, the two absolute values of degrees of rotation were not exactly identical due to small errors caused by dust or other impurities in the sample. In the oil wafting experiment, some may not have been able to differentiate between the two enantiomers if their noses lacked the chiral receptors required to recognize this

This could of happened because a bit more than 10 g of popcorn was added, someone with sweaty hands might have added extra bodily salts to the popcorn, or not all the water was squeezed out of the popcorn. Conclusion: In conclusion we did experiments to find out the salt and fat content in 10g of popcorn/chips. So that we could then compare it to what the packet says to see if that is correct or not. In the end our results did not correspond with the answers on the packet.

Isotopes of the same type will have a much more uniform weight. Despite these sources of error, the experiment was successful in representing the variations of the different isotopes of an

That is why there is no unusual data (almost all data was unusual), mainly because the experiment was done poorly. Research: My research is: (Primary Sources: Andrew Winebarger, youtube, How to make a toy parachute, 2008. ) (Secondary Sources:Yahoo Answers.)

The results of the phenol-sulfuric acid analysis conducted in this experiment suggest that the data acquired was relatively precise but inaccurate with respect to the given carbohydrate concentrations of the soda and Gatorade samples. Using a standard curve generated from a glucose solution with a known concentration, the carbohydrate concentration of the samples was determined (in terms of glucose) and a low coefficient of variation was calculated. However, a high percent relative error was apparent in the analysis of both samples. This may have been due to the fact that the analysis was conducted assuming glucose was the carbohydrate of interest, while, in fact, a significant portion of the monosaccharides would have existed as fructose (a

The experiment can be improved by using more accurate measurement when it comes to time and the distance, however this would not affect the results significantly because they are already very precise. Also the temperature could be taken digitally so that the thermometer’s bulb is not affected as much by the light intensity

These include the relatively small sample size, the single-session design, and the use of nonclinical samples. If these tests were conducted over a longer period of time with multiple sessions, it would have shown if EFT’s efficacy was stable and long lasting. Using a larger, clinical sample would have shown greater indication for EFT’s effect on the general public. In addition, human error could have affected the reliability of using salivary cortisol assays to measure cortisol levels. If there was a more accurate way to measure cortisol levels without the intervention of human error, this study could have benefited from it.

Looking at this value, and comparing the experimentally determined values, the values do not exactly match up, but are close together, as the values are only 0.4 - 0.6 g/mL away from the value of 1 g/mL. One reason why the values may not match up is because of the amount of liquid used. Sometimes, the value of water poured into the graduated cylinder may not be equal to specific volume which was to be used. In order to improve that, making the water volume more precise may allow for more accurate results. Secondly, the type of water used may of affected the value. If we take a look at pure water, the value of it at room temperature is 0.99823 g/mL. If we use this water (by boiling it before hand), and confirming the density is equal to the accepted value, than it will increase the chance of being more accurate.

The graph displays a negatively skewed trend, which suggests that the hypothesis was not supported. This is because the greatest percentage of caffeine (100%) did not result in the greatest reaction time, as predicted. The subjects who drank a 50% caffeinated beverage had the fastest reaction rate, taking an average of 0.39478 seconds to react. Comparatively, the subjects that drank the 100% caffeinated beverage had a slower average reaction time of 0.45917 seconds, taking longer to react. The subjects who were not exposed to any caffeine (0%) had a reaction time of 0.47293 seconds.