Activity Coefficient
Activity Coefficient
Activity Coefficient
S
<lJ
'J 55
'0
o
...
0-
50
...
0.6 0.5 0.1
40 '--__-J'--__--l -l. --l.. -.L>--..::..-_.....J
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.4
IJ.
I/
,. square root of the ionic strength.
Fig. 4.
Proceeding similarly with the data for the solubility in hydrochloric
acid and in thallous nitrate. we find other curves
l
which differ slightly
from those for potassium chloride and nitrate at higher concentrations,
but up to several hundredths molal the curves are all identical and lead
to the same extrapolated values of l/m, namely, 70.3. By reading
l The curves are drawn on so large a scale as to greatly exaggerate their differences.
The maximum difference at 0.05 M is only 1%.
1140 GILBERt N. LEWIS AND MERLE RANDALL.
from the various curves at round total molalities the values of 11m"" and
dividing by 70.3, we obtain the activity coefficient of thallous chloride,
in the various mixtures, as given in Table XIX.
TABLS XIX.
Activity Coefficient of Thallous Chloride at 25 o.
Total m. In KNO.. In KCl. In HC!. TINO.
0.001 0.970 0.970 0.970 0.970
0.002 0.962 0.962 0.962 0.962
0.005 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
0.01 0.909 0.909 0.909 0.909
0.02 0.872 0.871 0.871 0.869
0.05 0.809 0.797 0.798 0.784
0.1 0.742 0.715 0.718 0.686
0.2 0.676 0.613 0.630 0.546
Up to a concentration of about 0.02 M the rule stated in the preceding
section is completely corroborated, and we need not hesitate to assume
that in the dilute solutions the values of 'Y given in the table represent
also the activity coefficients of pure thallous chloride. Thus we may pre-
dict that if we could obtain a supersaturated solution of this salt at 0.02 M
its activity coefficient would be found to be 0.871. At values below
saturation (0.016 M) the values given in the table could be readily checked
either by the electromotive force or by the freezing-point method.
By comparing Table XIX with Tables V and XIV, we see that the ac-
tivity coefficient of thallous chloride is distinctly below that of sodium or
potassium chloride, which again corroborates a rule which we have men-
tioned before, and which was first observed in a study of the corrected
degree of dissociation, obtained by a combination of conductivity and
transference data.
Mixtures Containing Two or More Valence Types.-The remaining
cases in Table XVIII involve mixtures of thallous chloride with uni-
bivalent salts. Hence we are now forced to consider activity coefficients.
in mixtures of different valence types. We might guess the activity
coefficient of a given electrolyte to depend simply upon the total molal
concentration of electrolytes, or to depend upon the total equivalent con-
centration (which would be assuming that one molecule of a bivalent ion
has the effect of two molecules of a univalent ion). Neither of these two
guesses is correct, although the latter comes nearer the truth than the
former.
In attempting to solve this problem we have brought to light what ap-
pears to be a remarkably simple and precise generalization, which we shall
find to be in exact agreement with all of the experimental results which
are at present available. Before stating this new principle, we shall
introduce a new term, the ionic strength.
In any solution of strong electrolytes let us multiply the stoichiometrical
ACTIVITy COEFFICIENTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES. 1141
molality of each ion by the square of its valence (or charge). The sum
of these quantities, divided by two (since we have included both positive
and negative ions), we shall call the ionic strength, and designate by }.I.
Thus in pure solutions of potassium chloride, magnesium sulfate and
barium chloride, all at 0.01 M, we have, respectively, }.I = 0.01, }.I =
0.04, and }.I = [(4 X 0.01) + 0.02J/2 = 0.03. We may now state
our general principle: In dilute solutions the activity coefficient of a given
strong electrolyte is the same in all solutions of the same ionic strength.
In a solution which is 0.01 M in K
2
S0
4
the solubility of TlCl is
0.01779. We take half the sum of 0.01779 for 1'1+, 0.01779 for Cl-,
0.02000 for K+, and 4 X 0.01000 for S04--' hence }.I = 0.04779. Ob-
taining by this procedure the other values for K
2
S0
4
, TbS04 and BaC1
2
,
given in Table XVIII, we plot once more in Fig. 4, 11m: against the
square root of the ionic strength, }.I. We see that all the series give
curves which coincide, in dilute solutions, with one another and with the
curves obtained with the uni-univalent salts. As a further check it would
be desirable to have measurements of the solubility of thallous chloride in
salts like magnesium sulfate and lanthanum sulfate.
The Solubility of Uni-bivalent Salts.-We may next test the new prin-
ciple by a study of the influence of other salts upon the solubility of a
uni-bivalent salt. Here we shall utilize the data of Harkins and Win-
ninghoff
1
on the solubility of barium iodate in the presence of barium
nitrate and of potassium nitrate (represented, respectively, in Fig. 5
by circles and squares). Their results, together with the calculated
values of 11m: and of }.I, the ionic strength, are shown in Table XX.
1000
500
I---
---
~ ~
f----
, :e-
I---
--
r--- ~
--
-
Cl
~
f--
o
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
}.Io'h, cube root of the ionic strength
0.4 0.5
Fig. 5.
These values of 11m: are plotted against the cube root of the ionic
strength in Fig. 5. Our rule for mixtures evidently holds with great
1 Harkins and Winninghoff, THIS JOURNAL, 33, 1827 (1911).
1142 GILBERT N. LEWIS AND MERLE RANDALL.
0.00444
0.01274
0.0528
0.2008
776
690
477
39.';
0.000812
0.000913
0.001320
0.001595
0.002
0.01
0.05
0.2
precision. For practically all of the range shown in the figure the two
series fall on the same curve, which moreover proves to be a straight line.
TABLE XX.
Solubility of Barium Iodate in Barium Nitrate and in Potassium Nitrate.
m Ba(NO,),. m Ba(IO,),. I!m:. 1'. m KNO. m Ba(IO.),. I!m: 1'.
o 0.000790 797 0.00237
0.0005 0.000681 770 0.00354
0001 0.000606 751 0.00482
0.0025 0.000488 706 0.00896
0.01 0000337 597 0.0310
0.025 0.000307 472 0.0759
0.05 0.000283 396 0.1508
0.1 0.000279 317 0.3009
Throughout the range of concentration shown in Fig. 5 we may cer-
tainly assume that the value of 'Y is the same at a given ionic strength
as it would be for pure barium iodate, and can therefore be found from
the figure, if we divide the ord;nate at any concentration by the limiting
ordinate. Owing to the accuracy of the results, and especially to the in-
solubility of barium iodate, which renders necessary only a small extrapola-
tion, we may obtain the activity coefficients of barium iodate with much
certainty. In Table XXI values of 'Y so obtained are given at round
values of the molality, and compared with those of barium chloride (Tables
V and XIV). In accordance with the observation that we have previously
made, it is seen that in this case also the activity coefficient of a salt of
an oxygen acid is less than that of the corresponding halide.
TABLE XXI.
Activity Coefficients of Barium Iodate, at 25 o.
m. Ba(IO,)z. BaCk
0.001 0.834 0.865
0.002 0.790 0.830
0.005 0.714 0.771
0.Q1 0.639 0.716
002 0.549 0.655
Bi-bivalent Salts.-In the study of salts with two bivalent ions we have
little to add to our previous theoretical treatment, but we have material
for a still more severe test of our rule that the activity coefficient of any
electrolyte varies only with the total ionic strength of the solution.
Let us use for study the data of Harkins and Paine! on the solubility
of CaS04 in the presence of MgS0
4
, CUS04 and KN0
3
The solubilities
are given in the second column of Table XXII, the first column showing
the molality of the other salt which is added. The third column gives
the reciprocal of the mean molality, and it will be noted that m: in the
case of added potassium nitrate is simply the solubility of CaS04, while in
the case of the other two salts it is the geometrical mean of the total
calcium and total sulfate. The fourth column gives the ionic strength.
1 Harkins and Paine, THIS JOURNAL, 41, 1155 (1919).
ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES. 1U3
TABl.S XXII.
Solubility of Calcium Sulfate in the Presence of Other Salts at 25.
m.
(l!m",)
added m.
salt. CaSO. I!m",. 1'. -r(MgSO.). -r(MgSO.).
None 0.01535 65.15 0.0614 0.358 182
MgSO.
0.00502 0.01441 59.77 00777 0.327 183
0.010]2 0.01362 55.59 009.50 0.305 183
001528 0.01310 51.92 0.1135 0.286 181
CuSO.
001254 0.01360 .53.08 0.1046 0.298 179
00.5010 0.01239 35.97 0.250 0.200 180
0.1010 0.01242 26.67 0.454 0.162 166
0.2120 0.01329 12.92 0901 0.113 114
0.9771 0.01654 7.81 3.974
KN0
3
0.02766 0.01812 55.19 0.1001 0.300 1R4
0.0.5293 0.02019 49.53 0.1237 0.277 179
0.1038 0.02130 46.95 0.1890 0.231 204
\Ve already have activity coefficients for a substance very similar to
calcium sulfate, namely, magnesium sulfate. The best way, therefore, to
determine the proportionality factor which converts the values of 11m",
into values of "'I, would be to divide each value of 11m", by "'I for magnesium
sulfate at the same ionic strength, and then to find the limiting value of
this ratio at zero concentration (zero ionic strength). This is essentially
the method which we have illustrated before in determining the activity
coefficients of potassium chloride. We have, in Tables V and XIV, "'I
for MgS0
4
at several molalities, and therefore at the several values
of the ionic strength (which is four times the molality). By in-
terpolating we have thus obtained (Col. 3) the values of "'I (magnesium
sulfate), corresponding to the values of j.J. in our table, and the ratios
which we have just mentioned are given in the last column.
The results are very striking. Evidently, within the limits of experi-
mental error, the activity coefficient of calcium sulfate is identical with
that of magnesium sulfate up to an ionic strength of over 0.1. Taking
the limiting value of the ratio as 182, we find for calcium sulfate, in molal
copper sulfate, (j.J. = 4), 'Y = 7.81/182 = 0.043.
It may be that these results do not show superficially what an extra-
ordinary confirmation of our rule is furnished by these figures. Supposing
that we had measurements of the solubility of calcium sulfate in the pres-
ence of magnesium or copper sulfate, and were obliged to estimate from
these values its solubility in the presence of 0.05 M potassium nitrate.
Reversing our previous procedure (and using the method of approxima-
tions) we should calculate a value within 1% of that actually found, or
within the limits of expeIImental error. On the other hand, if we made a
similar calculation, assuming that it is not the ionic strength, but the
1144 GILBERt' N. LEWIS AND MERLE RANDALL.
equivalent concentration, which determines the activity coefficient, we
should make an error of over 20%. Or if we should assume neither of
these, but rather the molal concentration to be the governing factor, our
error would prove to be over 50%.
Uni-trivalent Salts.-It is evident that our rule for activity coefficients
in mixtures will be given a very severe test in systems involving trivalent
ions, for here, according to our rule, a certain concentration of trivalent
ion is nine times as effective as a univalent ion at the same molal concen-
tration. It is regrettable that no one has studied the influence of salts
containing polyvalent ions upon the activity coefficients of uni-univalent
electrolytes, although this could readily be done, either by adding a
lanthanum salt to the hydrochloric acid in the cell with hydrogen and
calomel electrodes, or by measuring the solubility of thallous chloride in
the presence of such a salt. On the other hand, Harkins and Pearce
l
have
measured the solubility of lanthanum iodate in the presence of lanthanum
nitrate, lanthanum ammonium nitrate, and sodium nitrate. Unfortu-
nately an error seems to have slipped into the first two of these series,
the source of which we are unable to discover, but the series with sodium
nitrate furnishes an excellent opportunity of testing our rule of mix-
tures.
'tABLE XXIII.
Solubility and Activity Coefficient of Lanthanum Iodate in Solutions of Sodium
Nitrate at 25.
(I!m",,)
NaNO,. La(IO,),.
I!m"".
p.. 'Y-La(NO,). 'Y-La(NO.); 'Y-La(IO.)o.
0 0.00103 426 0.00618 0.809 527 0.806
0.001 0.001043 421 0.00726 0.796 529 0.796
0.002 0.001056 415 0.00834 0.784 529 0.784
0.01 0.001150 382 0.0169 0.720 529 0.720
0.025 0.001309 335 0.0329 0.645 520 0.633
0.050 0.001492 294 0.0589 0.570 517 0.556
0.1 0.001748 251 0.1105 0.505 497 0.475
Once more, in Table XXIII, together with the molality of added salt
and the solubility of lanthanum iodate, we give the values of 11m"" cal-
culated therefrom. Lanthanum iodate and nitrate should closely re-
semble each other. We have already, in Tables V and XIV, obtained
values of 'Y for the nitrate, and from these we have interpolated the figures
corresponding to the several values of }J, (where for pure lanthanum
nitrate, }J, = 6m). Dividing 11m"" by 'Y of lanthanum nitrate, we obtain
the figures in the next to the last column, which afford once more a re-
markable confirmation of our rule, and show that for values of }J, up to
about 0.02, the activity coefficient of lanthanum iodate is the same as
that given by Lewis and Linhart for lanthanum nitrate, the average
1 Harkins and Pearce, THIS JOURNAL, 38, 2679 (1916).
ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES. 1145
deviation being hardly a O. 1%.1 In order to show the deviation at
higher concentration we have given in the last column of Table XXIII
the activity coefficient of lanthanum iodate in the mixture, obtained by
dividing each value of 1/m by 259.
The Activity Coefficients of Individual Ions.
In developing our equations we have made use of the activity coefficient
of the separate ions, and we have shown that, for a salt like potassium
chloride, the activity coefficient is the geometrical mean of the activity
coefficients, 'Y+ of potassium ion, and 'Y- of chloride ion. It remains for
us to consider whether these separate values can be experimentally de-
termined. This is a problem of much difficulty, and indeed we are far
from any complete solution at the present time.
At infinite dilution the activity coefficient is the same for all ions, and
equal to unity. As the concentration increases, we might expect that the
activity coefficients of two ions of similar type would remain approximately
the same, up to moderately concentrated solutions. We have seen in
the preceding section that in dilute solutions the mean activity coefficient
of an electrolyte is independent of the particular ions present in the solu-
tion, and this would hardly be true if it were not true also of the activity
coefficients of the individual ions.
MacInnes
2
has assumed that in two univalent salts with a common ion,
and at the same concentration, the common ion has the same activity
coefficient in both. This assumption, which should be confined to dilute
solutions, will be seen to be a corollary of a much wider generalization,
which the consideration of the preceding sections now permits us to make,
a generalization which will give us a very novel idea of the activities of
the separate ions in salts of a mixed valence type.
Hypothesis of the Independent Activity Coefficients of the 10ns.-In
studying the mean activity coefficients of the ions of numerous electro-
lytes it has been seen how advantageous it is to employ the quantity
which we have called the ionic strength, and the conclusion was reached
that, except in rather concentrated solutions, the activity coefficient of a
certain electrolyte is independent of the particular character of any
other strong electrolytes which may be present, but depends solely upon
the total ionic strength. Now, unless some peculiar compensation oper-
ates, this could hardly be true in general if it were not true of the individual
1 From considerations which we are about to make, we should expect the values
for the iodate to be slightly smaller than those for the nitrate, even at 0.01 iII. The
ahove (lata hardly suffice to warrant any exact conclusion in this regard.
:! :\'laeInnes, THIS ]OCRKAL, 41,1080 (lOla).
1146 GILBERT :\C. LEWIS AND MERLE RANDALL.
activity coefficients of the several ions, and we are thus led to the follow-
ing simple hypothesis: Tn dilute solution
l
the activity coefficient oj any
ion depends solely upon the total ionic strength oj the solution.
Accepting this hypothesis, it is possible to calculate the activity coef-
ficient of a salt when the activity coefficients of other salts are known.
For example, let us consider KCI, KIO
a
, BaCh and Ba(IO
s
)2' each at an
ionic strength of 0.01; in other words, we will consider the first pair at
0.01 M and the second pair at 0.0033 M. From Table V (interpolating in
the case of barium chloride), we find I'KCI = 0.922, I'KlO, = 0.882, and
I'BaCI, = 0.800. Let us calculate from these the value of I' for barium
. d - Woo 2 3 2 d d
10 ate. ntmg I'KCl = I'K+l'ct-; I'BaCI, = I'Ba ++I'ct-, an so on, an
taking the activity coefficient for each ion as the same in whichever salt
it appears, we obtain by simple algebra
(
I'KCI )4 (I'BaCh)3 (30)
'YKI03 = 'YBa(I03)2
and substituting the above values we find I'Ba(103h 0.754, while by in-
terpolating the experimental values of Table XXI we find 0.746. The
agreement is well within the limits of error.
. Unfortunately, the number of such chccks which are at present avail-
able is small, and our principle must therefore be regarded rather as a
prediction than as a summing up of accurate data now existing. We feel
confident, however, that this hypothesis will be verified by further exact
experimentation, and that even now we are safe to employ it, sometimes
in preference to experimental data, if these are of a low grade of accuracy.
Numerical Values of Ion-Activity Coefficients.-It is evident that if
we ascertain, or if we arbitrarily assume, the individual activity coeffi-
cient of some one ion, at a given value of the ionic strength, we can then
proceed to determine the values for other ions. Thus, at a given value of
f.L, if we had given the activity coefficient of sodium ion, we could combine
this with the known activity coefficient of sodium chloride to obtain the
value of chloride ion. Using then the known value for barium chloride,
we could obtain that of barium ion, and so on. MacInnes has suggested
that at each concentration the two ions of potassium chloride, "which
have nearly the same weight and mobility," be considered to have equa
I 'When we use the rather \'ague phrase "dilute solution" in a case like this we mean
that the principle as stated approaches complete validity as the dilution is indefinitely
increased. It becomes then a matter of experiment to determine to what concentra-
tions such a principle may be rell;arded as valid within certain limits of permissible
error, say 1%. With such interpretation it is our belief that this hypothesis is correct
over the same range as our previous rule of mixtures, namely, up to an ionic strength
of a few hundredths to a few tenths according to the nature of the ions. The degree
of departure in concentrated solutions doubtless depends upon numerous factors such
as the amount of hydration of the ion.
ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES, 1147
activity coefficients. This convention which, at least in the concentrated
solutions, must be regarded as purely arbitrary, we may adopt as well
as any other for the sake of obtaining a table of individual activity coeffi-
cients for the ions.
Thus when p. = 0.01 we take, both for K+ and Cl-, l' = 0,922 from
Table V. From the same table I'KIO. = 0,882, whence for 10
3
-, l' =
(0.882)2/0,922 = 0,845. For BaCb, when p. = 0.01 or m = 0.0033,
I'is 0.800. Whence, for Ba++, l' = (0.800)3/(0,922)2 = 0.602. Hence
the activities in the solution at this concentration are, for Ba++, a+ =
0.00333 X 0.602 = 0.00201, and for Cl-, a- = 0.00333 X 2 X 0.922 =
0.00614. Obviously this is a very radical departure from the idea that
the concentration, and hence approximately the activity, is half as great
for the barium as for the chloride ion.
By the method that we have just sketched, and by means of the pre-
vious tables, the values of Table XXIV have been obtained. These
values may be interpolated at intermediate concentrations, and thus we
find for MgSO. at 0.01 M, where p. = 0.04, 1'+ = 0.44, and 1'- =
0.38, whence l' = 0.41. This is to be compared with the value 0.40,
which we obtained from experimental measurements. The agreement
is better than we should expect, considering the uncertainty of some of
the experimental data.
TABU XXIV,
Activity Coefficients of Individual Ions at Various Values of the Ionic Strength.
p. ,= .. ' 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.1
E[+ .................. 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.88 0.84
OH- 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.81
CI", Br-, 1- 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.84 0.79
Li+ 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.81
0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.84 0.80
K+, Rb+. Cs+ 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.84 0.79
Ag +. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. 0.97 0 .16 0 .93 0 .90 0 .85 0 .80 0 .77
TI' 0.97 0.96 0.93 0.90 0.85 0.75 0.64
0.97 096 0.94 0.91 0.87 0.77 0.68
CIO.-, BrO.-. 10.- 0.95 0.93 0.89 0.85 0.79 0.70 0.61
1!e++
G
............. 0.78 0.74 0.66 0.60 0.53 0.43 0.34
SO.- - 0.7 0.'i1 0.63 056 0.47 0.35 0.26
.. 0.73 0.66 0.55 047 0.37 0.28 0.21
Under Me+ + we include Mg+ +, Ca + +, Sr+ +. Ba + +, Cu + +. Zn + +, Cd+ +,
except that for Cd + ; the value is not to be used for obtaining the activity coefficient
of a halide.
This table is prepared from fragmentary data and will need revision
when more data are available. 'Ve may predict, however, that when it
is so revised it will permit the accurate calculation of the activity coeffi-
cient of any strong electrolyte, except at one or two of the higher concen-
trations.
1148 GILBSRT N. LSWIS AND MSRLS RANDALL.
The Possible Determination of Ion-Activity Coefficients without any
Arbitrary Assumption.-Although the development as far as we have
carried it suffices for all ordinary thermodynamic calculations, it would be
of much theoretical interest if we could determine the actual activity
of an ion in a solution of any concentration. This indeed might be ac-
complished if we had any general method of calculating the potential
at a liquid junction. Such an attempt to estimate individual ion activi-
ties even in very concentrated solutions has been made by Hamed,1 but
he was obliged to make certain assumptions regarding the elimination of
liquid potentials which may be very far from valid.
Supposing that we consider the cell, H
2
Idil. HCII conc. HCII H2, the
electrotnotive force may be expressed by the equation
RT a+
E = -F In -, + E
L
(31)
a +
where the activity of hydrogen ion in the dilute solution is a+ and in
the concentrated a'+, while E
L
is the potential at the liquid junction.
Now, if a+ were very small, so that it could be taken as equal to the
molality, we could determine directly a'+ if we knew E
L
. This, unfor-
tunately, we do not know. The Nemst equation for the liquid potential
between the two concentrations of an electrolyte might be improved by
replacing concentration by activity, but even so the equation could
at best be valid only in very dilute solutions. Efforts to eliminate
such a liquid potential by interposing, between the two solutions, some
concentrated salt solution, like potassium chloride, have doubtless served
in many cases to reduce such a potential to a few millivolts. But by the
method so far proposed the elimination almost certainly has never been
complete, and the uncertainties increase with the concentration of the
solutions, between which the liquid potential is to be estimated.
In the case of a liquid junction between two different solutions of the
same concentration, conditions are quite similar.
2
The equation of Planck,S
as modified by Lewis and Sargent,
4
appears to give results in solutions of
moderate concentration which are approximately correct. Insofar as these
results go they are entirely consistent with our rule for the activity coef-
cient of the ions. Thus let us consider the cell Hg I HgClj HCl(O.1 M)I
KCI(O.1 M) [HgCl I Hg. Assuming that the activity of chloride ion
is the same in both solutions, the total e. m. f. of the cell must be equal
1 Harned, THIS JOURNAI., 42, 1808 (1920).
! On the other hand, the potential between two concentrations of the same elec-
trolyte is absolutely constant and reproducible, while that between two different elec-
trolytes depends upon the method of making the junction. and upon the time. See
Lewis, Brighton and Sebastian, THIS JOURNAI., 39, 2245 (1917).
I Planck, Ann. physik., 40, 561 (1890).
4 Lewis and Sargent. THIS JOURNAL, 31,363 (1909).
ACTIVITY CO:UFFICIaNTS OF STRONG :UL:UCTROLYTlS. 1149
to the potential between the liquids. The measured value at 18
0
is 0.0286
V,., while that calculated by the formula of Lewis and Sargent is also
0.0286. (The unmodified Planck equation gives 0.0271.) In more con-
centrated solutions, however, it is certain that such equations would
completely lose their validity. At the present time we must conclude
that the determination of the absolute activity of the ions is an interesting
problem, but one which is yet unsolved.
The Concentration of the Ions and the "True" Degree of Dissociation.
It will certainly be evident from the preceding that for all thermo-
dynamic calculations it is the activity of the ions and not their more or
less hypothetical concentration which is of value. Nevertheless, if the con-
centration of the ions, and the concentration of undissociated electrolyte,
are terms which have any exact significance, the determination of these
concentrations would be of much theoretical interest. Since our thermo-
dynamic methods do not give us these "true" concentrations we may con-
sider for a moment other methods which may have a bearing.
There is a group of properties which .give some evidence, though of a
somewhat conflicting character, upon this problem. The various partial
molal quantities which pertain to an electrolytic solute prove to be com-
pletely additive at infinite dilution; that is to say, they can be represented
as the sum of the two numbers, one characteristic of the cation, and the
other of the anion. How far this additive relation persists into the realm
of finite concentration, is an experimental problem which is far from
solved. Perhaps the best evidence that we have is that which concerns
the partial molal heat content.
The old law of the thermo-neutrality of salt solutions, which was a
powerful support of Arrhenius' theory of electrolytic dissociation, might
perhaps with equal force have been used against his assumption of
partial dissociation. If on mixing very dilute solutions of two salts,
let us say potassium chloride and sodium nitrate, we find no heat
evolved or absorbed, this is in accord with the additivity of heat contents
and is what would be expected from the theory of complete dissociation.
But if we obtain the same result at higher concentrations we might, by
this method of reasoning, be led to assume complete dissociation where
other criteria may lead us to assume a dissociation of only 50% or less.
The fact is that from the great mass of data obtained by Thomsen we may
state that, within the limits of error of his measurements, the partial molal
heat contents of all the strong electrolytes, up to a concentration of 0 . 5 M
or greater, seem to obey the additivity principle.!
1 Thus, for example, in the neutralization of any strong acid by a strong base. the
reaction may be regarded merely as H+ + OH- = H
2
0. and the heat of neutraliza-
tion is constant within the limits of his error. This is true of acids like Hel, HBr and
HNOI, and of bases like KOH. LiOH and Ba(OH)2 (whose dissociation at 0.5 M is
ordinarily assumed to be not over 70%). It is not true of acetic or phosphoric acid,
1150 CILI:l;R'l' LWIS AND 1r12RL RANDALL.
There are other properties which show the same kind of additivity.
Thus to quote A. A. Noyes,! "The optical activity and the color of salts
in solution * * * are additive with respect to the properties of
the constituent ions, even up to concentrations where a large propor-
tion of the salt is in the un-ionized state."
As Lewis
2
has remarked, "If we had no other criterion for the degree of
dissociation these facts would undoubtedly lead us to regard salts, up to
a concentration of normal or half-normal, as completely dissociated."
Indeed this conclusion had been drawn by Sutherland, I and more recently
this theory of complete dissociation has been adopted by Bjerrum, 4 Milner,
Ghosh
6
and numerous other authors who explain the properties of strong
electrolytes by the mutual influence of ions already separated to a con-
siderable distance. The diminution in equivalent conductivity and in
the thermodynamic degree of dissociation with increasing concentration
are both ascribed to the nearer approach of the charged particles rather
than to chemical union of the ions. Whether there is any essential differ-
ence between these two views is 8: question to which we shall revert pres
ently.
The Interpretation of Conductivity.-There remains only one method
of studying the concentration of the ions as distinct from their activities,
and this is the method of conductivity.
7
Unless our present theories of
nor even for sulfuric acid. which. with respect to its second dissociation, shows many
of the characteristics of a weak electrolyte.
Hamed (THIS JOURNAL, 42, 1808 (1920 has made an exact study of the partial
molal heat content of hydrochloric acid in 0.1 M solution when other chlorides are added.
He finds that this heat content changes by only 150 calories in the presence of 1.0 M
KCI. but by about 5000 cal. in the presence of 1.0 M LiCl.
I A. A. Noyes. address before International Congress of Arts and Sciencd, St.
Louis. Technology Quarterly, 17,293 (1904).
2 Lewis, Z. Physik. Chern. 70, 212 (1909).
a Sutherland, Phil. Mag., 3
1
161 (1902); 7, 1 (1906).
4 Bjerrum. Proc. VII Intern. Congo Appl. Chern. (London), 1909; Z. Elektrochern.
24,321 (1918); Medd. K. Vetenskapsakad. Nobelinst., 5, No. 16 (19Hl).
6 Milner. Phil. Mag. 25, 742 (1913).
6 Ghosh, J. Chem. Soc . 113, 149.627, 790 (1918). Since we are dealing primarily
with the thermodynamics of electrolytic solutions, we cannot discuss in full the methods
by which Ghosh is led from mechanical considerations to a remarkably simple equation
for electrolytic conductivity in aqueous and non-aqueous solutions. It is, howeTer.
our opinion that his work marks a new departure which will in time. and after lome
modification. lead to a satisfactory kinetic picture of the trend of conductivity and of
the activity coefficient. Readers of his papers will notice that the numerical factor
which occurs in his equation for the work of completely separating ions which are at
a given distance from one another, is identical with the factor by w1:ich we have multi
plied the molality of an electrolyte to obtain its ionic strength.
7 One other method has occasionally been attempted. namely, (0 t:ctennine the
concentration of ions by the speed of some reaction. In addition to the experimental
difficulties involved here, the method is probably unsound in principle. For any re-
ACTIVITY coEFFICIBNTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES. 11tH
the mechanism of electrical conduction are quite erroneous, there would
seem to be no objection to regarding the conductivity due to each ion as
the product of the mobility and the concentration of that ion. If then
we should adopt the assumption of Kohlrausch that the ion mobility is
independent of the concentration of the electrolyte, it would be neces-
sary to regard the conductivity as a direct measure of the ion concentra-
tion.
]ahn
1
was the first to express serious doubt as to the validity of the
Kohlrausch assumption of constant ion mobility. His conclusions were
somewhat discredited, because they were largely based upon the tacit
assumption that the quantities obtained by thermodynamic methods,
and which we now call the activities, must be equal to the ion concentra-
tions. Nevertheless, we are now certain that his contentions were in
the main correct.
After a careful scrutiny of existing data on conductivity and transfer-
ence numbers, Lewis
2
was able to show that certainly in many cases, and
presumably in all cases, the ion mobilities change with the concentra-
tion of electrolyte, and indeed by an amount which is some function of
the mobility of these ions at infinite dilution. He showed further that
by making an assumption, which is far more plausible than the one of
Kohlrausch, it is possible to determine, not an absolute degree of dissocia-
tion, but the ratio between the degrees of dissociation of any two salts.
We have had occasion to remark the striking parallelism between these
"corrected" degrees of dissociation, and the activity coefficients obtained
by thermodynamic means.
Since, however, these corrected degrees of dissociation are not abso-
lute but only relative, they permit us to assume either that many salts
are wholly dissociated, or are dissociated to an extent even less than that
given by the value of AlA0, according as we assume that. the mobility
of the ions diminishes, or increases, with increasing concentration.
What do we Mean by Degree of Dissociation?-Before discussing
further the significance of the conductivity values, it may be of interest
to view for a moment the logical implications of such a term as "degree of
dissociation."
Let us consider the equilibrium in the vapor phase, between diatomic
and monatomic iodine, and at such a temperature that on the average
each molecule of 1
2
, after it has been formed by combination of two
atoms, remains in the diatomic condition one minute before it redisso-
c i t t ~ s During this minute such a molecule will traverse several miles
action which is near equilibrium conditions, at least. it i ~ thermodynamically necessary
that the speed depend upon the activity, and not upon the concentration of the reacting
substances.
II Jahn, Z. physik. Chem., 33, 545 (1900).
:1 Lewis, THIS JOURNAl" 34, 1631 (1912).
1152 GILBSR'l' N. LBWIS AND MBRI.B RANDALL.
in a zigzag path, and after its dissociation each of its constituents will
traverse a similar path before it once more combines with another atom.
If we imagine an instantaneous photograph of such a gaseous mixture,
with such enormous magnifying power as to show us the molecules as
they actually exist at any instant, then by counting the single and double
molecules we should doubtless find the same degree of dissociation which
is actually determined by physico-chemical methods.
On the other hand, if we should choose a condition in which the dissocia-
tion and reassociation occurs 10
13
or 1014 times as frequently, the atoms
of the dissociated molecules would hardly emerge from one another's
sphere of influence before they would once more combine with each other,
or with new atoms. In such a case the time required, in the process of
dissociation, would be comparable with the total time during which the
atoms would remain free, and even our imaginary instantaneous photo-
graph would not suffice to tell us the degree of dissociation. For, first, it
would be necessary to know how far apart the constituent atoms of a
molecule must be, to warrant oUt" calling the molecule dissociated. But
such a decision would be arbitrary, and according to our choice of this
limiting distance, we should find one or another degree of dissociation.
Until a problem has been logically defined it cannot be experimentally
solved, and it seems evident in such a case as we are now considering
that, just as we should obtain different degrees of dissociation by different
choices of the limiting distance, so we should expect to find different de-
grees of dissociation when we come to interpret different experimental
methods.
Now it is generally agreed that ionic reactions are among the most rapid
of chemical processes, and it is in just such reactions that we should expect
to find difficulty in determining, either logically or experimentally a really
significant value of the degree of dissociation.
Conclusions.-On the whole, we must conclude that the degree of dis-
sociation and the concentration of the ions are quantities which we cannot
determine by existing methods, and which perhaps cannot be defined
without some degree of arbitrariness. The question is one which should
be left open, especially as its answer is of no immediate concern to those
who employ purely thermodynamic methods.
1
1 Since the above was written a paper has appeared by Harkins (Proc. Nat. A&ad.
Sci., 6, 601 (1920)), in which the author brings forward several arguments against the
assumption of the complete ionization of strong electrolytes. While we may subscribe
to Harkins' statements in the main, we cannot agree that his experimental work on
solubility demonstrates the presence of intermediate ions in strong uni-bivalent elec-
trolytes. Our treatment of his results in the preceding section has shown to what an
extraordinary degree the various types of strong electrolytes obey identical laws. These
calculations do not. of course, prove the theory of complete ionization, but they surely
cannot be used as an r ~ n t against that theory.
ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS OF STRONG ELECTROLYTES. 1153
Whatever conclusions may ultimately be reached regarding the degree
of dissociation of strong electrolytes, there can be no doubt whatever that
the phenomenon of dissociation is a very different thing in strong and in
weak electrolytes. In accordance with the theory of valence and molecu-
lar structure advanced by Lewis
1
we may explain such a difference as fol-
lows.
If we have a uni-univalent electrolyte whose cation is M+ and whose
anion is X-, the molecule may be represented by the formula M:X:,
where the pairs of dots represent the valence electrons, or the electrons
of the outer shells.
2
The pair lying between the atomic kernels M and X
constitutes the chemical bond. In the weak electrolytes, like acetic acid
or mercuric chloride, this approximates to the typical bond of organic
chemistry, but as we pass to stronger electrolytes the kernel of the cation
draws away from this bonding pair until, in the limit, this electron pair
may be regarded as the property of the anion alone. Then the positive
ion, which is the kernel M, is held to the symmetrical anion :X:, only
by the fact that they are oppositely charged. When an electrolyte in a
strongly polar or electrophilic medium approximates to this condition it
may be classified as a strong electrolyte. Whether we should call such
an electrolyte completely dissociated is, as we have seen, a matter of
choice. In all probability the additivity, in dilute solutions, of certain
physical properties, such as the heat content, accompanies the practical
disappearance of the chemical bond.
If then we agree that a strong electrolyte is one which is completely
polar,S and that the ions are held to one another by a simple electrostatic
force which obeys Coalomb's law, it becomes merely a matter of termin-
ology to decide whether we shall say that a certain fraction of such an elec-
trolyte is dissociated, or, with Ghosh, that a certain fraction of the ions
are free, or outside the "sphere of mutual attraction."
Summary.
After discussing various methods of determining the exact values of
the activity coefficient (thermodynamic degree of dissociation), we have
shown that the activity coefficients of sodium chloride (0-6 M), calculated
from freezing points, agree with those calculated from electromotive
force within a few tenths of a per cent., notwithstanding the fact that one
term alone in the freezing-point equation, which involves the heat of
1 Lewis, THIS JOURNAL" 38, 762 (1916).
2 We have for simplicity represented the ions as unso1vated. The same remarks
apply equally, however, to the more complicated case.
I We use the word polar in the sense proposed by Bray and Branch (THIS JOURNAL
35, 1440 (11113)) and by Lewis (ibid., 35, 1448 (1913)). .
1154
ARTHUR B. LAMB AND GORTON R. FONDA.
dilution, affects some of the results by 20%. An even more extensive
test of the several methods is furnished in the case of sulfuric acid, where
satisfactory agreement was obtained over the range from 0 to 20 M (66%
H
2
S0
4
) by three different methods.
Calculations of activity coefficients in mixtures, especially from the
solubility of salts in the presence of other salts, lead to an extremely power-
ful and general rule based upon the new concept of ionic strength. Each
ion contributes to this ionic strength by an amount which is proportional
to its stoichiometrical molality multiplied by the square of its valence.
In accordance with this rule the activity coefficient of every strong elec-
trolyte (and the individual activity coefficient of every ion) is the same in
all dilute solutions of the same ionic strength. It therefore depends in
no way upon the number or the nature of the ions of which the solution
is composed.
The general problem of the dissociation of strong electrolytes is dis-
cussed from several standpoints.
BIlRltllLIlY, CALIF.
[CONTRmUTJON FROM THE HAVEMJJ:YER CHEMICAL LABORATORY OF NEW YORX UNI-
VERSITY, AND THE CHEMICAL LABORATORY OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY.]
THE HYDROLYSIS OF DICHLORO AND HEXA-AQUO CHROMIC
CHLORIDES.
By ARTHUR B. LAMB AND GORTON R. FONDA.
Received March 15, 1921.
In a paper! published in 1906, it was shown that the change of r ~ n
chromic chloride into the blue (violet) isomer actually takes place through
the intermediate formation of an hydrolysis product of the green chloride,
presumably CrCbOH. Niels Bjerrum,2 in an able and comprehensive
paper published during the same year, arrived independently at the same
conclusion, and presented a large amount of quantitative evidence based
on kinetic measurements which agreed with it in a striking fashion.
In the course of his investigation Bjerrum measured the degree of
hydrolysis of both the green and the blue isomers, obtaining as average
values of the hydrolysis constants, 3.8 X 10-6, for the green, and 0.89 X
10-
4
for the blue salt at 25, the latter hydrolysis taking place according
to the equation
Cr(H
2
0)6+++ + H
2
0 = Cr(H
2
0)60H++ + H+.
Since then Sand and Grammling,8 from measurements of the potential
1 Lamb, THIS JOURNAL, 28,1710(906).
2 Bjerrum, Kgl. D. Vid. Selsk. Skr., (7) 4. 1 (1906); also Z. physik. Chem., 59,
336, 581 (1907).
2 Sand and Grammling, Z. physik. Chtm., 62, 1,28 (1908).