<p>just do old usnco tests to prep for it, lol.</p>
<p>Oh ok.
thank you, guys.
I appreciate your responses.</p>
<p>is princeton review good enough to pass the test?</p>
<p>HA is a weak acid with 4.0% dissociated at 0.100 M. Determine the Ka or this acid.
A. 0.0040
B. 0.0016
C. 0.040
D. 1.6
E 16.5</p>
<p>I am thinking there is a typo. What do you guys think?</p>
<p>PR tends to prepare you for questions that will appear on the exam.
Unlike Barrons, which is overkill.</p>
<p>hmm...yeah Im getting 0.00016 by setting x/0.1 = 0.04 and then doing (x)(x)/0.1....</p>
<p>yes, I confirmed that it's a typo.
The answer is 1.6 E -4</p>
<p>thanks for the responses</p>
<p>any websites for lab practice?</p>
<p>Has you teacher provided old AP lab questions for practice?</p>
<p>yes, and PR lab questions are very similar (there is basically 1 right way to do a lab, that is kinda the point)</p>
<p>A shout out for help here. I have the 1999 Chem MC exam but no answers...Our teacher gave it to us but I misplaced the sheet we got later with the answers. I would like to know what I got wrong so I can prepare this weekend. If someone with that exam could send me the answers (or just type them here 75 questions should take 2 minutes) I would be very grateful.</p>
<p>Please help!</p>
<p>i got barrons ap chem, i know everyones sayin its overkill but isnt that good cuz it 'overprepares' u for the test? im like 3/4ths done with the book and i started YESTERDAY. Ive been studyin nonstop but its only for one weekend and hopefully it proves to be worth it, </p>
<p>anways, why isnt barrons good? i mean the questions are pretty good.</p>
<p>First post =P</p>
<p>1999 MC answers were posted in this thread
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=342178%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=342178</a></p>
<p>I am doing like three or four practice exams and going over the problems I got wrong.
Hopefully that will help improve my MC score.
If it weren't for the Lab question, FR would have been much easier.</p>
<p>Here's a good review question:</p>
<p>What do you do if you want to use a buret?</p>
<p>There are several steps. See my next post for answers.</p>
<p><strong><em>ANSWERS</em></strong>***</p>
<p>Use funnel and pour liquid of SAME stuff, NOT WATER. Next, close the bottom. Pour stuff down until you have more than enough. Open the bottom until some liquid comes out and then quickly close it again. NOW, mark down the lower miniscus of the liquid. Open the buret's bottom, and mark where the lower miniscus is when you close it.</p>
<p>Anybody got good review for descriptive chem (solution and flame colors only please; I already know solubility rules)? Also, any review for complex ions other than double the charge of the cation to get the number of anions and keep the cation's single charge as the molecule's charge.</p>
<p>I have a question.
Ca, Ba, and Sr hydroxides are always soluble, right?
I have seen Ca(OH)2 many times, why is there discrepancy??</p>
<p>i have a question. i was going through PR's thermodynamics section and on #3 in the Problems section at the end of the chapter i couldn't figure out why the free energy of formation for the reactants would be 0. </p>
<p>in the chapter it only says the heat of formation of pure elements is 0, but doesnt say anything about free energy of formation.</p>
<p>can anyone explain?</p>
<p>When we're making ICE charts, can we always forget about the change in the reactant's concentration at equilibrium, if we only know the reactants initial concentration and then whatever constant?</p>
<p>@austin: yes, they are always soluble because group 1 and heavy group 2 hydroxides are strong bases. And Ca(OH)2 can be either, since it is hard to distinguish whether it is heavy or not; so whether you put it down has a strong base or not, you will still get the credit.</p>
<p>heat of formation for elements in pure state is ALWAYS 0. Why? I guess because not energy is needed to change to it ... its like that from the start</p>