<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Finding an Empirical Formula and Molecular Formula</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/</link>
	<description>Of Mice and Men... or Moles and Einstein</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:06:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mrs. Berger</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4280</link>
		<dc:creator>Mrs. Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4280</guid>
		<description>Hey there, MIchelle.  I would love to help you with your net ionic equations.  I was gone most of today because I had to take my son to the doctor.  He is ok but I didn&#039;t get to your question.  During his nap tomorrow, I will try to get to your question and if not then, sometime this weekend.  I will probably make a new post so just check the main site.  Until then...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey there, MIchelle.  I would love to help you with your net ionic equations.  I was gone most of today because I had to take my son to the doctor.  He is ok but I didn&#8217;t get to your question.  During his nap tomorrow, I will try to get to your question and if not then, sometime this weekend.  I will probably make a new post so just check the main site.  Until then&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4279</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4279</guid>
		<description>Hi Mrs.Berger, it&#039;s me again. Is it possible if you could teach me how to do Net Ionic equations? My teacher explained it to me, but I don&#039;t fully understand the concepts. Thank you for taking your time to read my message. =)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mrs.Berger, it&#8217;s me again. Is it possible if you could teach me how to do Net Ionic equations? My teacher explained it to me, but I don&#8217;t fully understand the concepts. Thank you for taking your time to read my message. =)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mrs. Berger</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4278</link>
		<dc:creator>Mrs. Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4278</guid>
		<description>Hope I am not too late to help, Adrianna.  YOu are on the right track with the empirical formula.  Since we know the formula mass to be 42.08 and if you take your empirical formulas mass to be Carbon + 2 Hydrogen = 14.03, you will find that 42.08 is about three times that amount.  So, the molecular formula must be three times the empirical, 3(CH2) = C3H6.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hope I am not too late to help, Adrianna.  YOu are on the right track with the empirical formula.  Since we know the formula mass to be 42.08 and if you take your empirical formulas mass to be Carbon + 2 Hydrogen = 14.03, you will find that 42.08 is about three times that amount.  So, the molecular formula must be three times the empirical, 3(CH2) = C3H6.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrianna</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4277</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrianna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4277</guid>
		<description>I actually have a question also...
I am asked to find the molecular formula while being given the following information. How can i come to the final answer?

formula mass= 42.08 amu
85.64g C
14.36g H

I already converted the two masses above to mol&#039;s and got the following:
7.13 mol C
14.22 mol H

After finding those i think that the empirical formula is this: 
CH2

If you could i help me i would really appreciate it =]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually have a question also&#8230;<br />
I am asked to find the molecular formula while being given the following information. How can i come to the final answer?</p>
<p>formula mass= 42.08 amu<br />
85.64g C<br />
14.36g H</p>
<p>I already converted the two masses above to mol&#8217;s and got the following:<br />
7.13 mol C<br />
14.22 mol H</p>
<p>After finding those i think that the empirical formula is this:<br />
CH2</p>
<p>If you could i help me i would really appreciate it =]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrianna</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4276</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrianna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:46:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4276</guid>
		<description>I was reading your website and it helped me a great deal when trying for find the molecular formula while only having the empirical formula and the molecular mass... Thanks a ton!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was reading your website and it helped me a great deal when trying for find the molecular formula while only having the empirical formula and the molecular mass&#8230; Thanks a ton!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mrs. Berger</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4275</link>
		<dc:creator>Mrs. Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:25:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4275</guid>
		<description>Yes, you are correct.  Glad I could help!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, you are correct.  Glad I could help!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nina</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4274</link>
		<dc:creator>nina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:21:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4274</guid>
		<description>ok so i would get AlBr3, since the ratio for Al2Br6 is 1:3. Thank you for taking the time to reply, ur explaination was very clear and helpful. 
thank you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ok so i would get AlBr3, since the ratio for Al2Br6 is 1:3. Thank you for taking the time to reply, ur explaination was very clear and helpful.<br />
thank you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mrs. Berger</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4273</link>
		<dc:creator>Mrs. Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4273</guid>
		<description>Nina,
In your molecular formula, you have two aluminum atoms and six bromine atoms.  This is a 2:6 ratio.  I am not going to do your problem but one similar so maybe you can get the idea.  Take, for example, the formula P5O10 (five phosphorus and ten oxygens).  This is a 5:10 ratio.  Both of these numbers can be divided by the same factor - 5.  If I divide 5 by 5, I get 1 and if I divide 10 by 5 I get 2.  Therefore the REDUCED ratio of 5:10 is actually 1:2.  So the EMPIRICAL formula would be PO2.  Another example - molecular formula is C3H8.  The ratio is 3:8.  This cannot be reduced so the Empirical Formula is C3H8 - the same as the molecular formula.  This is ok.  The empirical formula is just the LOWEST WHOLE NUMBER RATIO of the elements in a compound.  Did that make any sense?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nina,<br />
In your molecular formula, you have two aluminum atoms and six bromine atoms.  This is a 2:6 ratio.  I am not going to do your problem but one similar so maybe you can get the idea.  Take, for example, the formula P5O10 (five phosphorus and ten oxygens).  This is a 5:10 ratio.  Both of these numbers can be divided by the same factor &#8211; 5.  If I divide 5 by 5, I get 1 and if I divide 10 by 5 I get 2.  Therefore the REDUCED ratio of 5:10 is actually 1:2.  So the EMPIRICAL formula would be PO2.  Another example &#8211; molecular formula is C3H8.  The ratio is 3:8.  This cannot be reduced so the Empirical Formula is C3H8 &#8211; the same as the molecular formula.  This is ok.  The empirical formula is just the LOWEST WHOLE NUMBER RATIO of the elements in a compound.  Did that make any sense?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nina</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4272</link>
		<dc:creator>nina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 02:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4272</guid>
		<description>I totally dont understand the case of changing molecular to empirical formula, is there a simpler way u can explain this please. For example i have to Write the empirical formula corresponding to this molecular formulas, Al2Br6.

Thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally dont understand the case of changing molecular to empirical formula, is there a simpler way u can explain this please. For example i have to Write the empirical formula corresponding to this molecular formulas, Al2Br6.</p>
<p>Thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mrs. Berger</title>
		<link>http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4271</link>
		<dc:creator>Mrs. Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 19:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chemberger.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/finding-an-empirical-formula-and-molecular-formula/#comment-4271</guid>
		<description>Mike &amp; John - I am not in the business of giving answers but if you read the previous comments, you will find that I explain that a molecular formula, like what you have for acetone, is the ACTUAL formula of a compound and the empirical formula is found by taking the lowest ratio of those elements.  My response to Chloe explains this for glucose - by dividing C6H12O6 all by the common factor of 6, we get the empirical formula of CH2O.  So, for acetone, C2H4O2, what factor do all your subscripts have in common, divide them all by that, and rewrite your formula in this lowest whole number ratio.  If you post what you think it might be, I will tell you if you are right or not. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike &amp; John &#8211; I am not in the business of giving answers but if you read the previous comments, you will find that I explain that a molecular formula, like what you have for acetone, is the ACTUAL formula of a compound and the empirical formula is found by taking the lowest ratio of those elements.  My response to Chloe explains this for glucose &#8211; by dividing C6H12O6 all by the common factor of 6, we get the empirical formula of CH2O.  So, for acetone, C2H4O2, what factor do all your subscripts have in common, divide them all by that, and rewrite your formula in this lowest whole number ratio.  If you post what you think it might be, I will tell you if you are right or not. <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
