A21.82 gram sample of an organic compound containing c, h and o is analyzed by combustion analysis and 21.33 grams of co2 and 4.366 grams of h2o are produced. in a separate experiment, the molar mass is found to be 90.04 g/mol. determine the empirical formula and the molecular formula of the organic compound.

The molecular formula for the given organic compound is

Explanation:

where, 'x', 'y' and 'z' are the subscripts of Carbon, hydrogen and oxygen respectively.

We are given:

Mass of

Mass of

We know that:

Molar mass of carbon dioxide = 44 g/mol

Molar mass of water = 18 g/mol

In 44g of carbon dioxide, 12 g of carbon is contained.

So, in 21.33 g of carbon dioxide, of carbon will be contained.

In 18g of water, 2 g of hydrogen is contained.

So, in 4.366 g of water, of hydrogen will be contained.

To formulate the empirical formula, we need to follow some steps:

Moles of Carbon =

Moles of Hydrogen =

Moles of Oxygen =

For the mole ratio, we divide each value of the moles by the smallest number of moles calculated which is 0.485 moles.

For Carbon =

For Hydrogen  =

For Oxygen  =

The ratio of C : H : O = 1 : 1 : 2

Hence, the empirical formula for the given compound is

For determining the molecular formula, we need to determine the valency which is multiplied by each element to get the molecular formula.

We are given:

Mass of molecular formula = 90.04 g/mol

Mass of empirical formula = 45 g/mol

Putting values in above equation, we get:

Multiplying this valency by the subscript of every element of empirical formula, we get:

Thus, the molecular formula for the given organic compound is

when—without warning—something provokes your anger, you may struggle not to succumb to it. since what typically makes you mad is feeling powerless in the face of what seems unfair, your anger is mostly an attempt at a “quick fix” to right the balance. it’s as though you’re raising a fist in protest, proclaiming that you’re not going to capitulate to such injustice.

there are, however, a multitude of problems related to this immediate, push-back reaction of anger. and probably the key one is that almost never does it resolve the issue that gave rise to it. such reactive anger is probably best understood as self-defeating. as david burns, the author of the seminal self- book feeling good, observes: if realistically, acting on your anger is to make any sense, it needs to meet two criteria—which, in almost every case, is frankly impossible. that is, your anger must:

be directed toward a person who has intentionally (and needlessly) behaved in a hurtful way toward you; and

be beneficial or advantageous to you (i.e., assist you in achieving a desired goal).

i think you’ll agree that only rarely can you claim that your anger is both warranted and , whether to yourself or the relationship.

so let me offer you a two-step alternative to abandoning your better judgment and giving in to the temptation of anger—one that should neutralize your anger in seconds. or, when you’re really angry, in minutes.

but keep in mind that you must really want to execute these steps, be sufficiently motivated to perform them. which means overcoming more unconscious resistance than you might ever have imagined. because there are many immediate “advantages” of anger that can interfere with your resolve, i’ll suggest a few of them that might interfere with your employing this powerful method to rid yourself of counter-productive anger.

explanation: