<p>An increased reaction rate means the molecules are colliding more often in the right orientation, and with enough energy to overcome the activation energy of the reaction. A catalyst does the same thing, so although increased temperature changes the equilibrium constant, it also reaches equilibrium faster.</p>
<p>i thought that Raising the temperature “gives” more energy to the reaction so that the reaction can overcome the activation energy that it needs, so raising the temperature would allow the the reaction to proceed at a quicker rate, so it would reach equilibrium at a faster rate, just the equlibrium constant would be shifted</p>
<p>I agree with sententia and IamCool, temperature should make a reaction proceed faster by increasing the frequency of collisions no matter what right? Plus, the second one says temperature leads to higher rate of reaction, which leads to equilibrium faster, no?</p>
<p>I was thinking T for II and possibly F for I. I’m still really confused. I know that temperature changes change the position of equilibrium. and by definition, equilibrium is the state at which both forward and reverse rxns occur at the same rate. does this necessarily happen sooner with increased temp?</p>
<p>Ok there another T/F Question:</p>
<p>HC2H3O2 is stronger than HCl — False</p>
<p>The molecular structure of HC2H3O2 has more H atoms — True</p>
<p>Right?</p>
<p>“I was thinking T for II and possibly F for I. I’m still really confused. I know that temperature changes change the position of equilibrium. and by definition, equilibrium is the state at which both forward and reverse rxns occur at the same rate. does this necessarily happen sooner with increased temp?”</p>
<p>^^ I got TTCE for that one</p>
<p>jollyrancher, yeah i put F,T for that question</p>
<p>I know this has been brought up a lot already, but curve predictions?</p>
<p>-3 raw = 800 in CB practice, but I thought this test was harder than the practice, so maybe the curve will be better?</p>
<p>Wait, what was the second part of that one? atoms or ions?</p>
<p>@ sententia</p>
<p>It definitely said atoms.</p>
<p>yeah jolly rancher, that one was F then T. and you wouldn’t refer to the H’s as ions since they’re in a molecular compound. atoms is the correct term</p>
<p>When they dissociate they become ionized. I don’t really remember the question so that’s why I was asking.</p>
<p>I know this has been brought up a lot already, but curve predictions?</p>
<p>-3 raw = 800 in CB practice, but I thought this test was harder than the practice, so maybe the curve will be better?</p>
<p>^^Any thoughts?</p>
<p>Ignore. :)</p>
<p>Are you referring to the May test? :O</p>
<p>Did you think that one was easier than the CB practice?
And has the official curve for that test been released already? Because you can’t know for sure since some of the answers we discuss could be wrong, no?</p>
<p>x.x</p>
<p>Could -8 (the worst I’m expecting) be below 750? If I want to retake should I cancel or does it not matter?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought that I was in the CR forum. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Curves are never released except in the official books.</p>
<p>Anyone know anything about the Sunday Chem SAT II?</p>
<p>hey but i do think that the may curve was released in ‘profesionals’ section of cb???
I think somebody posted one…?</p>
<p>^^If they did post em, I’m sure lots of people on this forum, including me, would be glad to have it reposted here.</p>