Amr Morsi Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 Very few, if present, chemical reactions that lead to store chemical reactions into compounds, like photosynthesis. Does this mean that chemical energy is to a vanish?
swansont Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 Very few, if present, chemical reactions that lead to store chemical reactions into compounds, like photosynthesis. Does this mean that chemical energy is to a vanish? It doesn't vanish, it just changes into other forms. e.g. exothermic reactions heat up the surroundings.
Amr Morsi Posted August 1, 2011 Author Posted August 1, 2011 I understand swansont. I mean that the direction of transformation is in that of reducing chemical reactions to other forms.
mississippichem Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 I understand swansont. I mean that the direction of transformation is in that of reducing chemical reactions to other forms. What do you mean by reducing? Sorry, I'm not trying to be difficult here. "Reducing" just has a very specific meaning in chemistry that isn't in line with the non-scientific usage of the word, similar to confusion over the word "work" in physics.
Amr Morsi Posted August 1, 2011 Author Posted August 1, 2011 I MEAN THAT APPROXIMATELY ALL CHEMICAL REACTIONS ARE IN THE DIRECTION OF GETTING CHEMICAL ENERGY FROM CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS AND NOT THE OPPOSITE. Is it still ununderstandable?
swansont Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 No need to shout. The laws of thermodynamics apply to chemistry. Entropy is going to increase.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now