0
$\begingroup$

A question says:

Find the empirical formula of an organic compound from the following composition:

34.62% C, 3.88% H, 61.50% O.

The answer is $\ce{C3H4O4}$. It was found by using the mass (percentages) divided by the molar mass of each element.

But they didn't consider the (2moles) of hydrogen and oxygen in calculations. Why? in this case it will be $\ce{CH3O3}$

On the other hand, in a similar question in the text book, they consider the moles of hydrogen and oxygen in calculations by multiplying by 2 after getting the moles.

Could anybody explain?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The answer is $\ce{C3H4O4}$. It was found by using the mass (percentages) divided by the molar mass of each element.

Exactly! That's the way to do it.

But they didn't consider the (2moles) of hydrogen and oxygen in calculations. Why? In this case it will be $\ce{CH3O3}$

No, they did not! As you have pointed out yourself, it is about the empirical formula of a compound in question, such as one of the following:

enter image description here

It is completely irrelevant whether an element usually exists as a diatomic molecule in nature. If that would matter, how would you then treat sulfur-containing compounds? Note that natural sulfur typically consists of $\ce{S8}$ molecules! How would you treat elements that only appear in the form of compounds in nature but never as pure elements.

In summary, the "natural appearance" of elements in nature does not matter here, it is only about the relative atomic abundance of an element in the compound in question.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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