2 Removed mathmode for \eqref

For some reason this question reminds me of Maxwell's demon paradox. You don't really separate anions and cations here; in reality the resulting metal ($$\ce{M+}$$) cryptand ($$\ce{L}$$) complex is going to be associated with anionic part ($$\ce{X-}$$) in organic solvent ($$\ce{s}$$) after it's being extracted from aqueous phase ($$\ce{w}$$). For the detailed process, refer to [1], for example.

There are two main processes to consider:

\begin{align} \ce{L_\mathrm{s} + M^+_\mathrm{s} &<=> LM^+_\mathrm{s}}\label{rxn:1}\tag{1}\\ \ce{\overline{\ce{L}} + M^+_\mathrm{w} + X^-_\mathrm{w} &<=> \overline{\ce{LMX}}}\tag{2} \end{align}

You would be correct if only $$\eqref{rxn:1}$$\eqref{rxn:1} occurs, however, this is not the case.

### Reference

1. Fyles, T. M. Can. J. Chem. 1987, 65 (4), 884–891. DOI 10.1139/v87-149 (Open Access).

For some reason this question reminds me of Maxwell's demon paradox. You don't really separate anions and cations here; in reality the resulting metal ($$\ce{M+}$$) cryptand ($$\ce{L}$$) complex is going to be associated with anionic part ($$\ce{X-}$$) in organic solvent ($$\ce{s}$$) after it's being extracted from aqueous phase ($$\ce{w}$$). For the detailed process, refer to [1], for example.

There are two main processes to consider:

\begin{align} \ce{L_\mathrm{s} + M^+_\mathrm{s} &<=> LM^+_\mathrm{s}}\label{rxn:1}\tag{1}\\ \ce{\overline{\ce{L}} + M^+_\mathrm{w} + X^-_\mathrm{w} &<=> \overline{\ce{LMX}}}\tag{2} \end{align}

You would be correct if only $$\eqref{rxn:1}$$ occurs, however, this is not the case.

### Reference

1. Fyles, T. M. Can. J. Chem. 1987, 65 (4), 884–891. DOI 10.1139/v87-149 (Open Access).

For some reason this question reminds me of Maxwell's demon paradox. You don't really separate anions and cations here; in reality the resulting metal ($$\ce{M+}$$) cryptand ($$\ce{L}$$) complex is going to be associated with anionic part ($$\ce{X-}$$) in organic solvent ($$\ce{s}$$) after it's being extracted from aqueous phase ($$\ce{w}$$). For the detailed process, refer to [1], for example.

There are two main processes to consider:

\begin{align} \ce{L_\mathrm{s} + M^+_\mathrm{s} &<=> LM^+_\mathrm{s}}\label{rxn:1}\tag{1}\\ \ce{\overline{\ce{L}} + M^+_\mathrm{w} + X^-_\mathrm{w} &<=> \overline{\ce{LMX}}}\tag{2} \end{align}

You would be correct if only \eqref{rxn:1} occurs, however, this is not the case.

### Reference

1. Fyles, T. M. Can. J. Chem. 1987, 65 (4), 884–891. DOI 10.1139/v87-149 (Open Access).
1

For some reason this question reminds me of Maxwell's demon paradox. You don't really separate anions and cations here; in reality the resulting metal ($$\ce{M+}$$) cryptand ($$\ce{L}$$) complex is going to be associated with anionic part ($$\ce{X-}$$) in organic solvent ($$\ce{s}$$) after it's being extracted from aqueous phase ($$\ce{w}$$). For the detailed process, refer to [1], for example.

There are two main processes to consider:

\begin{align} \ce{L_\mathrm{s} + M^+_\mathrm{s} &<=> LM^+_\mathrm{s}}\label{rxn:1}\tag{1}\\ \ce{\overline{\ce{L}} + M^+_\mathrm{w} + X^-_\mathrm{w} &<=> \overline{\ce{LMX}}}\tag{2} \end{align}

You would be correct if only $$\eqref{rxn:1}$$ occurs, however, this is not the case.

### Reference

1. Fyles, T. M. Can. J. Chem. 1987, 65 (4), 884–891. DOI 10.1139/v87-149 (Open Access).