Why is my conclusion inconsistent with the van't Hoff equation? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)What kind of equilibrium constant we use for Gibbs free energy and Van't Hoff equation?What is the name for the equation ΔG = ΔG° + RT ln Q?Finding the thermodynamics of protein unfolding from temperature and absorbance using fluorescence spectroscopy?What's the source of “2.303” in Van't Hoff equation?Derivation of van 't Hoff equation for temperature dependence of equilibrium constantHow to derive Van't Hoff equation for Henry's constantVan't Hoff Equation with changing EnthalpyHow did Williard Gibbs come up with the Gibbs equation?Density calculation with cubic equation of stateWhy might copper have a lower heat capacity than lithium according to the Shomate Equation?
How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?
Why do people hide their license plates in the EU?
What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?
Why did the rest of the Eastern Bloc not invade Yugoslavia?
What does the "x" in "x86" represent?
Why did the Falcon Heavy center core fall off the ASDS OCISLY barge?
How do I stop a creek from eroding my steep embankment?
Error "illegal generic type for instanceof" when using local classes
How to answer "Have you ever been terminated?"
How to react to hostile behavior from a senior developer?
How discoverable are IPv6 addresses and AAAA names by potential attackers?
What exactly is a "Meth" in Altered Carbon?
How to bypass password on Windows XP account?
What does this icon in iOS Stardew Valley mean?
Single word antonym of "flightless"
Is it true that "carbohydrates are of no use for the basal metabolic need"?
What's the meaning of 間時肆拾貳 at a car parking sign
Why are Kinder Surprise Eggs illegal in the USA?
porting install scripts : can rpm replace apt?
When were vectors invented?
List of Python versions
Generate an RGB colour grid
Is the Standard Deduction better than Itemized when both are the same amount?
Denied boarding although I have proper visa and documentation. To whom should I make a complaint?
Why is my conclusion inconsistent with the van't Hoff equation?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)What kind of equilibrium constant we use for Gibbs free energy and Van't Hoff equation?What is the name for the equation ΔG = ΔG° + RT ln Q?Finding the thermodynamics of protein unfolding from temperature and absorbance using fluorescence spectroscopy?What's the source of “2.303” in Van't Hoff equation?Derivation of van 't Hoff equation for temperature dependence of equilibrium constantHow to derive Van't Hoff equation for Henry's constantVan't Hoff Equation with changing EnthalpyHow did Williard Gibbs come up with the Gibbs equation?Density calculation with cubic equation of stateWhy might copper have a lower heat capacity than lithium according to the Shomate Equation?
$begingroup$
Let's say I hypothesize that a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ has a slope of $-∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $0$. I prove it simply:
$$∆G^circ = -RTln K quadtoquad ln K = -frac∆G^circRT$$
This matches the linear form $y = mx + b$. Thus, plotting $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ would have a slope $m = -∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept $b = 0$.
However, I understand that a van't Hoff plot defines a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ to have a slope of $-ΔH^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $∆S^circ/R$. It is clear from the relation $∆G^circ = ∆H^circ - TΔS^circ$ that my final equation is thermodynamically equivalent to the van't Hoff equation. I do not disagree that
$$ln K = -frac∆H^circRT + frac∆S^circR,$$
but if I were to experimentally measure temperature and calculate the equilibrium constant temperature, why should I expect the y-intercept to be $∆S^circ/R$ as defined by van't Hoff rather than $0$ as I defined above? Why should I expect the slope to be $-ΔH^circ/R$ instead of $-ΔG^circ/R$? What makes the van't Hoff equation match experimentally determined values over the equation $ln K = -∆G^circ/(RT)$?
thermodynamics free-energy
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let's say I hypothesize that a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ has a slope of $-∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $0$. I prove it simply:
$$∆G^circ = -RTln K quadtoquad ln K = -frac∆G^circRT$$
This matches the linear form $y = mx + b$. Thus, plotting $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ would have a slope $m = -∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept $b = 0$.
However, I understand that a van't Hoff plot defines a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ to have a slope of $-ΔH^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $∆S^circ/R$. It is clear from the relation $∆G^circ = ∆H^circ - TΔS^circ$ that my final equation is thermodynamically equivalent to the van't Hoff equation. I do not disagree that
$$ln K = -frac∆H^circRT + frac∆S^circR,$$
but if I were to experimentally measure temperature and calculate the equilibrium constant temperature, why should I expect the y-intercept to be $∆S^circ/R$ as defined by van't Hoff rather than $0$ as I defined above? Why should I expect the slope to be $-ΔH^circ/R$ instead of $-ΔG^circ/R$? What makes the van't Hoff equation match experimentally determined values over the equation $ln K = -∆G^circ/(RT)$?
thermodynamics free-energy
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let's say I hypothesize that a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ has a slope of $-∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $0$. I prove it simply:
$$∆G^circ = -RTln K quadtoquad ln K = -frac∆G^circRT$$
This matches the linear form $y = mx + b$. Thus, plotting $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ would have a slope $m = -∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept $b = 0$.
However, I understand that a van't Hoff plot defines a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ to have a slope of $-ΔH^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $∆S^circ/R$. It is clear from the relation $∆G^circ = ∆H^circ - TΔS^circ$ that my final equation is thermodynamically equivalent to the van't Hoff equation. I do not disagree that
$$ln K = -frac∆H^circRT + frac∆S^circR,$$
but if I were to experimentally measure temperature and calculate the equilibrium constant temperature, why should I expect the y-intercept to be $∆S^circ/R$ as defined by van't Hoff rather than $0$ as I defined above? Why should I expect the slope to be $-ΔH^circ/R$ instead of $-ΔG^circ/R$? What makes the van't Hoff equation match experimentally determined values over the equation $ln K = -∆G^circ/(RT)$?
thermodynamics free-energy
New contributor
$endgroup$
Let's say I hypothesize that a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ has a slope of $-∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $0$. I prove it simply:
$$∆G^circ = -RTln K quadtoquad ln K = -frac∆G^circRT$$
This matches the linear form $y = mx + b$. Thus, plotting $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ would have a slope $m = -∆G^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept $b = 0$.
However, I understand that a van't Hoff plot defines a graph of $ln K$ vs. $1/T$ to have a slope of $-ΔH^circ/R$ and a $y$-intercept of $∆S^circ/R$. It is clear from the relation $∆G^circ = ∆H^circ - TΔS^circ$ that my final equation is thermodynamically equivalent to the van't Hoff equation. I do not disagree that
$$ln K = -frac∆H^circRT + frac∆S^circR,$$
but if I were to experimentally measure temperature and calculate the equilibrium constant temperature, why should I expect the y-intercept to be $∆S^circ/R$ as defined by van't Hoff rather than $0$ as I defined above? Why should I expect the slope to be $-ΔH^circ/R$ instead of $-ΔG^circ/R$? What makes the van't Hoff equation match experimentally determined values over the equation $ln K = -∆G^circ/(RT)$?
thermodynamics free-energy
thermodynamics free-energy
New contributor
New contributor
edited 7 hours ago
Karsten Theis
4,604542
4,604542
New contributor
asked 10 hours ago
Mateen KasimMateen Kasim
213
213
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In the linear form $y = mx + b$, both $m$ and $b$ are constants, i.e. they don't depend on $x$. On the other hand, $Delta G^circ$ definitely depends on the temperature (and consequently on its inverse $1/T$). So if you plot a function $$f(x) = m x$$ where $m$ is not a constant but a function dependent on $x$, you might get something unexpected. In your case, $x$ is $1/T$ and $$m = -fracDelta HR + fracT Delta SR$$
The $y$-intercept corresponds to an infinitely high temperature where $-fracDelta HR times frac1T$ tends to zero and $fracT Delta SR times frac1T$ cancels to be just $fracDelta SR$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The fact of the matter is that the differential version of your equation
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta G^circR$$
is not exact (because $Delta G^circ$ is a function of $T$) while the form of the van't Hoff equation involving differentials
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta H^circR$$
is exact. Moreover, the derivation of the van't Hoff equation properly takes into account the fact that, in varying temperature $T$, the initial and final states for $Delta G^circ$ are constrained to be at 1 bar. So, in the van't Hoff development, the temperature derivative of $Delta G^circ$ is exactly given by
$$fracDelta G^circmathrmdT = -Delta S^circ$$
This important constraint is not even addressed in your approach.
Finally, do you have a reference where it asserts that the intercept at $(1/T) to 0$ is supposed to be $Delta S^circ/R$?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Mateen Kasim is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112871%2fwhy-is-my-conclusion-inconsistent-with-the-vant-hoff-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In the linear form $y = mx + b$, both $m$ and $b$ are constants, i.e. they don't depend on $x$. On the other hand, $Delta G^circ$ definitely depends on the temperature (and consequently on its inverse $1/T$). So if you plot a function $$f(x) = m x$$ where $m$ is not a constant but a function dependent on $x$, you might get something unexpected. In your case, $x$ is $1/T$ and $$m = -fracDelta HR + fracT Delta SR$$
The $y$-intercept corresponds to an infinitely high temperature where $-fracDelta HR times frac1T$ tends to zero and $fracT Delta SR times frac1T$ cancels to be just $fracDelta SR$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the linear form $y = mx + b$, both $m$ and $b$ are constants, i.e. they don't depend on $x$. On the other hand, $Delta G^circ$ definitely depends on the temperature (and consequently on its inverse $1/T$). So if you plot a function $$f(x) = m x$$ where $m$ is not a constant but a function dependent on $x$, you might get something unexpected. In your case, $x$ is $1/T$ and $$m = -fracDelta HR + fracT Delta SR$$
The $y$-intercept corresponds to an infinitely high temperature where $-fracDelta HR times frac1T$ tends to zero and $fracT Delta SR times frac1T$ cancels to be just $fracDelta SR$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the linear form $y = mx + b$, both $m$ and $b$ are constants, i.e. they don't depend on $x$. On the other hand, $Delta G^circ$ definitely depends on the temperature (and consequently on its inverse $1/T$). So if you plot a function $$f(x) = m x$$ where $m$ is not a constant but a function dependent on $x$, you might get something unexpected. In your case, $x$ is $1/T$ and $$m = -fracDelta HR + fracT Delta SR$$
The $y$-intercept corresponds to an infinitely high temperature where $-fracDelta HR times frac1T$ tends to zero and $fracT Delta SR times frac1T$ cancels to be just $fracDelta SR$.
$endgroup$
In the linear form $y = mx + b$, both $m$ and $b$ are constants, i.e. they don't depend on $x$. On the other hand, $Delta G^circ$ definitely depends on the temperature (and consequently on its inverse $1/T$). So if you plot a function $$f(x) = m x$$ where $m$ is not a constant but a function dependent on $x$, you might get something unexpected. In your case, $x$ is $1/T$ and $$m = -fracDelta HR + fracT Delta SR$$
The $y$-intercept corresponds to an infinitely high temperature where $-fracDelta HR times frac1T$ tends to zero and $fracT Delta SR times frac1T$ cancels to be just $fracDelta SR$.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 9 hours ago
Karsten TheisKarsten Theis
4,604542
4,604542
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Isn't ∆Gº a constant defined at 298 K? The relation ∆Gº=-RTlnK gives the standard change in free energy (i.e. 298 K, 100 kPa, 1M), so wouldn't this value be constant for a given reaction? Plus, if we were talking about non-standard values, doesn't change in enthalpy depend on temperature as well?
$endgroup$
– Mateen Kasim
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MateenKasim You are varying the temperature. The Gibbs energy and the equilibrium constant are significantly temperature-dependent. The enthalpy is temperature-dependent too, but to a much lesser degree.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
$begingroup$
If you want to see the rigorous treatment, look at the answer posted by @Chet_Miller.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The fact of the matter is that the differential version of your equation
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta G^circR$$
is not exact (because $Delta G^circ$ is a function of $T$) while the form of the van't Hoff equation involving differentials
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta H^circR$$
is exact. Moreover, the derivation of the van't Hoff equation properly takes into account the fact that, in varying temperature $T$, the initial and final states for $Delta G^circ$ are constrained to be at 1 bar. So, in the van't Hoff development, the temperature derivative of $Delta G^circ$ is exactly given by
$$fracDelta G^circmathrmdT = -Delta S^circ$$
This important constraint is not even addressed in your approach.
Finally, do you have a reference where it asserts that the intercept at $(1/T) to 0$ is supposed to be $Delta S^circ/R$?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The fact of the matter is that the differential version of your equation
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta G^circR$$
is not exact (because $Delta G^circ$ is a function of $T$) while the form of the van't Hoff equation involving differentials
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta H^circR$$
is exact. Moreover, the derivation of the van't Hoff equation properly takes into account the fact that, in varying temperature $T$, the initial and final states for $Delta G^circ$ are constrained to be at 1 bar. So, in the van't Hoff development, the temperature derivative of $Delta G^circ$ is exactly given by
$$fracDelta G^circmathrmdT = -Delta S^circ$$
This important constraint is not even addressed in your approach.
Finally, do you have a reference where it asserts that the intercept at $(1/T) to 0$ is supposed to be $Delta S^circ/R$?
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The fact of the matter is that the differential version of your equation
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta G^circR$$
is not exact (because $Delta G^circ$ is a function of $T$) while the form of the van't Hoff equation involving differentials
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta H^circR$$
is exact. Moreover, the derivation of the van't Hoff equation properly takes into account the fact that, in varying temperature $T$, the initial and final states for $Delta G^circ$ are constrained to be at 1 bar. So, in the van't Hoff development, the temperature derivative of $Delta G^circ$ is exactly given by
$$fracDelta G^circmathrmdT = -Delta S^circ$$
This important constraint is not even addressed in your approach.
Finally, do you have a reference where it asserts that the intercept at $(1/T) to 0$ is supposed to be $Delta S^circ/R$?
$endgroup$
The fact of the matter is that the differential version of your equation
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta G^circR$$
is not exact (because $Delta G^circ$ is a function of $T$) while the form of the van't Hoff equation involving differentials
$$fracmathrmdlnKmathrmdleft(frac1Tright) = -fracDelta H^circR$$
is exact. Moreover, the derivation of the van't Hoff equation properly takes into account the fact that, in varying temperature $T$, the initial and final states for $Delta G^circ$ are constrained to be at 1 bar. So, in the van't Hoff development, the temperature derivative of $Delta G^circ$ is exactly given by
$$fracDelta G^circmathrmdT = -Delta S^circ$$
This important constraint is not even addressed in your approach.
Finally, do you have a reference where it asserts that the intercept at $(1/T) to 0$ is supposed to be $Delta S^circ/R$?
edited 4 hours ago
andselisk
19.6k665127
19.6k665127
answered 4 hours ago
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,6411613
6,6411613
add a comment |
add a comment |
Mateen Kasim is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mateen Kasim is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mateen Kasim is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mateen Kasim is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112871%2fwhy-is-my-conclusion-inconsistent-with-the-vant-hoff-equation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown