Would someone mind proof reading my abstract? (Cobalt Equilibrium lab)
"This experiment regards to the equilibrium of two different colored ions formed by cobalt (II) chloride (CoCl2) in water. The forming ions include blue tetracholorcobalt (II) ion, [CoCl4]2-, which reacts with water to form pink hexaaquocobalt (II), [Co(H20)6]2+.1 The goal for this experiment was to determine the responses of this particular system at equilibrium, with the separate additions of HCl and D.I. water.1 Le Châtelier's principle was used to predict the effect of the addition of HCl and D.I. water on this chemical equilibrium. This principle states that if stress is applied to a system, it will cause the system to react in such a way in order to counteract the change. This experiment concluded that with the addition of HCl and D.I. water, it caused the reaction to shift equilibrium in the opposing direction. Such shifts were observed by the distinct changes in color. The addition of HCl to aqueous pink CoCl2 caused the reaction to shift in an opposing direction, which resulted in the solution turning blue. Similarly, the shifting of equilibrium was seen when D.I. water was added to the resultant blue solution in which a reverse reaction occurred as the color changed from blue to its original pink. Further tests were performed to alter the chemical equilibrium in a way that produced similar reactions. For example, heat was added to CoCl2 to see if it would cause a color change from pink to blue. However, because of an insufficient amount of heat, the solution remained pink and unchanged. The second test performed involved substituting D.I. water with AgNO3 to restore the [CoCl4 ]2-ion back to its original pink color. The results from this test were adequate as the resulting solution was indeed pink, but included the formation of a white precipitate, AgCl."
"goal of", not "goal for" The experiment was not completing a goal, you were.
Thank you @doc.brown. what do you mean by "you were"
You were completing the goal. The experiment wasn't.
oh ok i understand what you mean! Makes sense
"...with the addition of HCl and D.I. water, it caused the reaction to shift..." I would say "...each addition of HCl or D.I. water caused the reaction to shift..." I would also write out hydrochloric acid and deionized. Pretend the reader doesn't know what you're talking about.
heat was added to see if it would cause a color change, because of an insufficient amount of heat the solution remained unchanged. That's not science.
It's good how you say cobalt (II) chloride (CoCl2). Whenever you write CoCl2 in the future, I can always look back in your text and see the written words. You don't do that for HCl and AgNO3.
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!