I know this video is quite old, but thank you so much!! For some reason teachers love to give very vague lessons. This really helps clear up all the little things!!
First line: "a couple of video agos we learned.." lol i still love your videos and appreciate your attempt to give students an intuitive insight on the subject matter
I wasn't in class when this topic was taught, and I didn't do well on the test. I have my midterm tomorrow so I was looking up videos to teach me and know it all comes to me so easily! Thank you Kahn Academy!
I'm pretty sure he should have used moles instead of mass when using the equation regarding phase change (vaporization/melting). Because mass would not cancel delta H (KJ/mol), only moles will. and the equation for q is "q = n X delta H (vap) NOT "m X delta H". where n is moles not mass. He seems to be correct for heating up/cooling down a phase, using mass as the q. Because, that equation is "q= m X C X delta T". Does anyone agree? if so, like so they can see and update this video. source- "principles of chemistry text book 2nd edition".
@Maishir Yes, the Celsius and the Kelvin scale are essentially the same, except 0K is -273.15*C so the kelvin scale starts at a lower point but the amount of heat you need to add to increase by 1*C or 1K is the same - (or for liquid water, 4J) inb4 confusing
Thanks so much, got me to understand heating curves more and what happens when you add in a certain amount of energy into the system. Homework accomplished :)
Sal you said that the Hf was 333.55, when you did the problem you multiplied it as 335.55*200 and it gave me a wrong number when I did it with the initial Hf you gave (333.55).
I cannot thank you enough for all your videos. I have used them for Physiology, Chemistry, Microbiology, & Physics. Always so helpful, clear, short and sweet! You are awesome!
it isn't the same. for the equations, you are only interested in the CHANGE in temperature. The DIFFERENCE from -10 degrees C to 0 degrees C is the same as 263.15 K to 273.15 K: 10 degrees.
So actually you told that the heat of fusion is the amount of heat required to take away yo fuse 100°C ice into 100°C water, it's not 100°C, it's 0°C ice to 0°C water... Yes and you're the best teacher I've ever had🛐
U just helped me understand something that took a week for me to even get enough interest to try in school. Come to my school and be a chemestry teacher please. :)
lol I love how he trolled us and left out the fucking biggest amount of energy in the formation of water vapor. then he's just like "oh uh looks like I forgot that little detail " lmao
My college instructor couldn't explain this in this way at all. I could not understand the difference between specific heat and heat of fusion until I watched this video. Thanks! I don't know why teachers (seem to) think that the way to make a class a challenge is to explain things cryptically. I have to see the whole picture to get it. Learning deficiency or not, if teachers want to force the archaic model on people, they should not be teachers.
7:18 , did he change or make a mistake on the number of *heat of fusion* that is *(333.55)* writing it he like 335.55? Because sins that its totally diferent the results. Please tell me, I am confused...!
+Holly O'Riordan grams and Kg are all SI units. It doesn't matter which one you use. I guess it depends on what your professor wants too. But actually most of the time grams are used rather than Kg or mg, etc.
When I learned this in class, for the segments that the phase changes take place. So for segment B and D, where melting and vaporization take place. The formula I was given was the number of moles x delta H fusion, and moles x delta H vap. Is this still the same???? I am confused!
1)do i have to go the very same procedure if the graph starts at the horizontal axis? 2)there is no alternative method of doing it,for instance dpoing it in one line by taking out the common factor which is the mass?
@caribbeansuntrue all of his constants are in grams, so no problem. He does get the definition of fusion backwards though. Fine video mostly. Easy to understand when you can rewind and play again and again...
I get this video, but it would be better if conversions are done to show that the measurements are actually canceling out before arriving to the final answer. And I notice that the heat of fusion value used midway in the video was incorrect because at the start of the video, what was written is 333.55 J/g, but what was used is 335.55 J/g.
I have a question probably a stupid one but nevertheless here it is: Once the ice is heated enough it turns into a liquid shouldn't we change metric system? after all aren't liquids expressed in Liters?
And then I only have 3 minutes to do this problem in reality... That's about how much time our instructor gave us to solve this type of problem. Time is up, and finger is crossed.
If heat does not rise while undergoing fusion or fission, what is happening to the atoms and molecules when the energy is being applied to the system? If they are not vibrating more and creating more heat, how is the energy affecting the atoms?
@SirMaarten314 No question is a stupid one. ;-) You would not make this conversion because grams measures weight while mL an L measures volume, two completely different things. Also grams is metric already XP.