0
$\begingroup$

I was wondering if there is an original scientific publication showing why $C_1V_1 = C_2V_2$ works.

Or perhaps, who described/used it first?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
5
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Maybe this would be better asked on History of Science and Mathematics. $\endgroup$ – Martin - マーチン♦ Sep 6 '20 at 13:18
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This is probably the extension of the definition of the word "concentration" which was probably used already in the Middle Age, with masses of course (instead of moles}.There is probably no original scientific publication of the definition of the concentration. $\endgroup$ – Maurice Sep 6 '20 at 13:36
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Very difficult to find out because this formula is a special case of general mass balance equations. We will have to find who came up with mass balance equation? $\endgroup$ – M. Farooq Sep 6 '20 at 14:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Even the ancient merchants realized 10 sacks with 50 coins each means 500 coins and that if you put 100 coins into a sack then 5 sacks is enough. Why to scientifically show that it works, when everyday life showed it almost 2000 years ago ? $\endgroup$ – Poutnik Sep 7 '20 at 10:20
  • $\begingroup$ I’m voting to close this question because this is a history question, not a chemistry one. $\endgroup$ – Jan Sep 24 '20 at 11:36
1
$\begingroup$

tl;dr It's so simple it was likely never published as a "research result", since it stems quite directly from definitions.

It's a small step from the conservation of matter and the definition of concentration.

By definition: $C = \frac{n}{V}$, thus $n = CV$. If you dilute with pure solvent, you don't change the amount of solute that you have, in other words: $n_1 = n_2$. Using the previous equation, you get $C_1V_1 = C_2V_2$.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I don't see how this answers the question. OP is asking about the origins of the expressions in terms of history, not why it's mathematically correct. $\endgroup$ – andselisk♦ Sep 6 '20 at 13:14
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ My point is that it's so simple it was likely never published as a "research result", since it stems quite directly from definitions. $\endgroup$ – Raphaël Sep 6 '20 at 13:26

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.