Access the PDF of Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN 1133949649 9781133949640 immediately with all chapters

Download Reliable Study Materials and full Test Banks at testbankpack.
com
Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical

Reactivity 9th Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and
Treichel ISBN 1133949649 9781133949640
http://testbankpack.com/download/solution-manual-for-
chemistry-and-chemical-reactivity-9th-edition-kotz-treichel-
townsend-and-treichel-isbn-1133949649-9781133949640/
OR CLICK HERE
DOWLOAD NOW
Visit now to discover comprehensive test banks for all subjects at testbankpack.com
Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.
Test Bank for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th

Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN
1133949649 9781133949640
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-chemistry-and-chemical-
reactivity-9th-edition-kotz-treichel-townsend-and-treichel-
isbn-1133949649-9781133949640/
testbankpack.com
Solution Manual for Chemical Investigations for Chemistry

for Changing Times 14th by Hill Creary Hassell and Marshal
ISBN 0133891852 9780133891850
http://testbankpack.com/download/solution-manual-for-chemical-
investigations-for-chemistry-for-changing-times-14th-by-hill-creary-
hassell-and-marshal-isbn-0133891852-9780133891850/
testbankpack.com
Solution Manual for Chemistry in Context Applying

Chemistry to Society 8th Edition by American Chemical
Society ISBN 007352297X 9780073522975
http://testbankpack.com/download/solution-manual-for-chemistry-in-
context-applying-chemistry-to-society-8th-edition-by-american-
chemical-society-isbn-007352297x-9780073522975/
testbankpack.com
Solution Manual for Calculus of a Single Variable Hybrid

Early Transcendental Functions 6th Edition by Larson and
HEdwards ISBN 1285777050 9781285777054
http://testbankpack.com/download/solution-manual-for-calculus-of-a-
single-variable-hybrid-early-transcendental-functions-6th-edition-by-
larson-and-hedwards-isbn-1285777050-9781285777054/
testbankpack.com
Test Bank for Physics Technology Update 4th Edition Walker
0321903080 9780321903082
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-physics-technology-
update-4th-edition-walker-0321903080-9780321903082/
testbankpack.com
Test Bank for Hands On Networking Fundamentals 2nd Edition

Palmer 1111306745 9781111306748
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-hands-on-networking-
fundamentals-2nd-edition-palmer-1111306745-9781111306748/
testbankpack.com
Test Bank for Fundamentals of Corporate Finance 10th

Edition by Ross Westerfield Jordan ISBN 0078034639
9780078034633
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-fundamentals-of-
corporate-finance-10th-edition-by-ross-westerfield-jordan-
isbn-0078034639-9780078034633/
testbankpack.com
Test bank for Humanistic Tradition 7th Edition Fiero

9781259360664 1259360660
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-humanistic-
tradition-7th-edition-fiero-9781259360664-1259360660/
testbankpack.com
Test Bank for Elementary and Intermediate Algebra Concepts

and Applications 7th Edition by Bittinger Ellenbogen and
Johnson ISBN 013446270X 9780134462707
http://testbankpack.com/download/test-bank-for-elementary-and-
intermediate-algebra-concepts-and-applications-7th-edition-by-
bittinger-ellenbogen-and-johnson-isbn-013446270x-9780134462707/
testbankpack.com
Solution Manual for Childhood Voyages in Development 5th
Edition by Rathus ISBN 1133956475 9781133956471
http://testbankpack.com/download/solution-manual-for-childhood-
voyages-in-development-5th-edition-by-rathus-
isbn-1133956475-9781133956471/
testbankpack.com
Atoms, Molecules, and Ions
Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th

Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN
1133949649 9781133949640
Full link download:
Solution Manual:
https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-
manual-for-chemistry-and-chemical-
reactivity-9th-edition-kotz-treichel-
townsend-and-treichel-isbn-1133949649-
9781133949640/
Test Bank:
https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-chemistry-and-chemical-
reactivity-9th-edition-kotz-treichel-townsend-and-treichel-isbn-
1133949649-9781133949640/
Chapter 2
Atoms, Molecules, and Ions
INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES
Although much of this chapter will be review for many students who have taken high school chemistry, the ideas
included are so central to later study that class coverage will probably be necessary. Key topics are the structure of
the atom and related information (atomic number, isotopes), the mole unit, the periodic table, chemical formulas
and names, and the relationships between formulas and composition. Three to five class periods will probably be
necessary in order to address the essentials in this chapter unless your students are well-versed in some of these
topics.
Some points on which students have some problems or questions are:

(a) The rule of determining the charges on transition metal cations tells students that they can assume such ions
usually have 2+ or 3+ charges (with 2+ charges especially prominent). They are often uneasy about being
given this choice. We certainly emphasize that they will see other possibilities (and that even negative charges
are possible but that they will not see them in the general chemistry course).
(b) Students have to be convinced that they have no choice but to learn the language of chemistry by memorizing
the names and charges of polyatomic ions. They can be reminded that correct names and formulas are
required to prevent serious consequences, such as the use of the wrong medicine which can have tragic results
or the purchase of the wrong substance which leads to wasted resources.
(c) A very common problem students have is recognizing that MgBr 2, for example, is composed of Mg2+ and
two Br– ions. We have seen such combinations as Mg2+ and Br22–.
SUGGESTED DEMONSTRATIONS
1. Properties of Elements
Take as many samples of elements as possible to your lecture on the elements and the periodic table.
See the series by Alton Banks in the Journal of Chemical Education titled “What's the Use?” This series
describes a different element each month and gives references to the Periodic Table Videodisc.
Pinto, G. “Using Balls from Different Sports to Model the Variation of Atomic Sizes,” Journal of
Chemical Education 1998, 75, 725.
2. Atomic Structure
Hohman, J. R. “Introduction of the Scientific Method and Atomic Theory to Liberal Arts
Chemistry Students,” Journal of Chemical Education 1998, 75, 1578.
3. Elements That Form Molecules in Their Natural States
Use samples of H2, O2, N2, and Br2 to illustrate elements that are molecules.
20
© 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Atoms, Molecules, and Ions Chapter 2
4. Formation of Compounds from Elements and Decomposition of a Compound into Its Elements
Bring many samples of compounds to your lecture. Ignite H 2 in a balloon or burn Mg in O2 to show how
elements are turned into compounds. Also burn Mg in CO 2 to show CO2 is made of C and that MgO can be
made another way.
5. Ionic Compounds
Bring a number of common, ionic compounds to class.
6. The Mole Concept
To illustrate the mole, take 1 molar quantities of elements such as Mg, Al, C, Sn, Pb, Fe, and Cu to
the classroom.
When doing examples in lecture, it is helpful to have a sample of the element available. For example, hold
up a pre-weighed sample of magnesium wire and ask how many moles of metal it contains. Or, drop a pre-
weighed piece of sodium metal into a dish of water on the overhead projector, and ask how many moles of
sodium reacted.
7. Molar Quantities
Display molar quantities of NaCl, H2O, sugar, and common ionic compounds. Especially show some
hydrated salts to emphasize the inclusion of H2O in their molar mass.
Display a teaspoon of water and ask how many moles, how many molecules, and how many total atoms
are contained.
Display a piece of CaCO3 and ask how many moles are contained in the piece and then how many
total atoms.
8. Weight Percent of Elements
When talking about weight percent of elements, use NO2 as an example and then make NO2 from Cu and
nitric acid.
9. Determine the Formula of a Hydrated Compound
Heat samples of hydrated CoSO4 or CuSO4 to illustrate analysis of hydrated compounds and the color
change that can occur when water is released and evaporated.
For the discussion of analysis, heat a sample of CoCl2·6 H2O in a crucible to illustrate how to determine the
number of waters of hydration and also discuss the distinctive color change observed during this process.
21
SOLUTIONS TO STUDY QUESTIONS

2.1 Atoms contain the fundamental particles protons (+1 charge), neutrons (zero charge), and electrons (–1
charge). Protons and neutrons are in the nucleus of an atom. Electrons are the least massive of the
three particles.
2.2 Mass number is the sum of the number of protons and number of neutrons for an atom. Atomic mass is the
mass of an atom. When the mass is expressed in u, the mass of a proton and of a neutron are both
approximately one. Because the mass of electrons is small relative to that of a proton or neutron, the
mass number approximates the atomic mass.
2.3 Ratio of diameter of nucleus to diameter of electron cloud is 2 × 10 −3 m (2 mm) to 200 m or 1:10 5. For
the diameter of the atom (i.e., the electron cloud) = 1 × 10 −10 m (1 × 10−8 cm), the diameter of the
nucleus is 1 × 10−10 m/105 = 1 × 10−15 m = 1 × 10−13 cm = 1 fm.
2.4 Each gold atom has a diameter of 2 145 pm = 290. pm
12
36 cm · 1 m · 10 pm · 1 Au atom = 1.2 109 Au atoms
100 cm 1m 290. pm
27
2.5 (a) 12 Mg (b) 48 Ti (c) 62 Z
22 30
n
59 244 184
2.6 (a) 28 Ni (b) 94 Pu (c) 74 W
2.7 electrons protons neutrons

(a) 12 12 12
(b) 50 50 69
(c) 90 90 142
(d) 6 6 7
(e) 29 29 34
(f) 83 83 122
2.8 (a) Number of pro tons = number of el ectrons = 43; number of neutrons = 56
(b) Number of pro tons = number of el ectrons = 95; number of neutrons = 146
–28
mass electron 9.109383 10 g
2.9 = = 5.446170 10–4
mass proton 1.672622 10–24 g
The proton is 1834 times more massive than an electron. Dalton’s estimate was off by a factor of about 2.
2.10 Negatively charged electrons in the cathode-ray tube collide with He atoms, splitting the atom into an
electron and a He+ cation. The electrons continued to be attracted to the anode while the cations
passed through the perforated cathode.
2.11 Alpha particles are positively charged, beta particles are negatively charged, and gamma particles are
neutral. Alpha particles have more mass than beta particles.
22
2.12 Atoms are not solid, hard, or impenetrable. They have mass (an important aspect of Dalton’s hypothesis),
and we now know that atoms are in rapid motion at all temperatures above absolute zero (the kinetic-
molecular theory).
16
2.13 O/12C = 15.995 u/12.000 u = 1.3329
2.14 15.995 u · 1.661 × 10−24 g/u = 2.657 x 10-23 g

57 58 60
2.15 27 Co (30 neutrons), 27 Co (31 neutrons), and 27 Co (33 neutrons)
2.16 Atomic number of Ag is 47; both isotopes have 47 protons and 47 electrons.
107 Ag 107 – 47 = 60 neutrons
109 Ag 109 – 47 = 62 neutrons
11H,
2.17 protium: one proton, one electron
2
1H, deuterium: one proton, one electron, one neutron
3
1H, tritium: one proton, one electron, two neutrons
19 20 21
9 X, 9 X, and 9X are isotopes of X
The atomic weight of thallium is 204.3833. The fact that this weight is closer to 205 than 203 indicates
2.18 that the 205 isotope is the more abundant.
2.19
2.20 Strontium has an atomic weight of 87.62 so 88Sr is the most abundant.
2.21 (6Li mass )(% abundance) + (7Li mass)(% abundance) = atomic weight of Li
(6.015121 u)(0.0750) + (7.016003 u)(0.9250) = 6.94 u
2.22 (24Mg mass)(% abundance) + (25Mg mass)(% abundance) + (26Mg mass)(% abundance)
= atomic weight of Mg
(23.985 u)(0.7899) + (24.986 u)(0.1000) + (25.983 u)(0.1101)
= 24.31 u
2.23 Let x represent the abundance of 69Ga and (1 – x) represent the abundance of 71Ga.
69.723 u = (x)(68.9257 u) + (1 – x)(70.9249 u)
x = 0.6012; 69Ga abundance is 60.12%, 71Ga abundance is 39.88%
2.24 Let x represent the abundance of 151Eu and (1 – x) represent the abundance of 153Eu.
151.965 u = (x)(150.9197 u) + (1 – x)(152.9212 u)
x = 0.4777; 151Eu abundance is 47.77%, 153Eu abundance is 52.23%
23
2.25 titanium thallium

symbol Ti Tl
atomic number 22 81
atomic weight 47.867 204.3833
period 4 6
group 4B 3A
metal metal
2.26 silicon tin antimony sulfur selenium

symbol Si Sn Sb S Se
atomic number 14 50 51 16 34
period 3 5 5 3 4
group 4A 4A 5A 6A 6A
metalloid metal metalloid nonmetal nonmetal
2.27 Periods 2 and 3 have 8 elements, Periods 4 and 5 have 18 elements, and Period 6 has 32 elements.
2.28 There are 26 elements in the seventh period, the majority of them are called the Actinides, and many of
them are man-made elements.
2.29 (a) C, Cl
(b) C, Cl, Cs, Ca
(c) Ce
(d) Cr, Co, Cd, Cu, Ce, Cf, Cm
(e) Cm, Cf
(f) Cl
2.30 There are many correct answers for parts (a) and (d). Possible answers are shown below.
(a) C, carbon (c) Cl, chlorine
(b) Rb, rubidium (d) Ne, neon
2.31 Metals: Na, Ni, Np

Nonmetals: N, Ne
2.32 (a) Bk
(b) Br
(c) B
(d) Ba
(e) Bi
24 24
© 2015
© 2015 Cengage Cengage
Learning. All Learning. All Rights
Rights Reserved. May Reserved. May notcopied
not be scanned, be scanned, copied or
or duplicated, or duplicated,
posted to a or postedaccessible
publicly to a publicly accessible
website, website,
in whole or inin whole or in part.
part.
Visit https://testbankpack.com
now to explore a rich
collection of testbank or
solution manual and enjoy
exciting offers!
2.33 Molecular formula for nitric acid: HNO3
Structural formula:
The molecule is planar.
2.34 Molecular formula for asparagine: C4H8N2O3
Structural formula:
2+
2.35 (a) Mg (b) Zn2+ (c) Ni2+ (d) Ga3+
2–
2.36 (a) Se (b) F– (c) Fe2+, Fe3+ (d) N3–
2+
2.37 (a) Ba (e) S2–
–
(b) Ti4+ (f) ClO4
2+
(c) PO43– (g) Co
– 2–
(d) HCO3 (h) SO4
– +
2.38 (a) MnO4 (d) NH4 (b)
NO2– 3–
(e) PO4 (c)
H2PO4– (f) SO3
2–
2.39 Potassium loses 1 electron when it becomes a monatomic ion. Argon has the same number of electrons as
the K+ ion.
2.40 They both gain two electrons. O2– has the same number of electrons as Ne and S2– has the same number
of electrons as Ar.
2.41 Ba2+, Br– BaBr2
2.42 Co3+, F– CoF3

+ 2– + 3–
2.43 (a) 2 K ions, 1 S ion (d) 3 NH4 ions, 1 PO4 ion
2+ –
(b) 1 Co ion, 1 SO42– ion 2+
(e) 1 Ca ion, 2 ClO ions
+ – + –
(c) 1 K ion, 1 MnO4 ion (f) 1 Na ion, 1 CH 3 CO 2 ion
2.44 (a) 1 Mg
2+
ion, 2 CH3CO2– ions 4+ 2–
(d) 1 Ti ion, 2 SO4 ions
3+ – + –
(b) 1 Al ion, 3 OH ions (e) 1 K ion, 1 H2PO4 ion
25 25
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2+
(c) 1 Cu ion, 1 CO32– ion 2+ 2–
(f) 1 Ca ion, 1 HPO4 ion
2.45 Co2+: CoO Co3+ Co2O3
26 26
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2+
2.46 (a) Pt : PtCl2 Pt4+: PtCl4
2+
(b) Pt : PtS Pt4+: PtS2
2.47 (a) incorrect, AlCl3 (c) correct
(b) incorrect, KF (d) correct
2.48 (a) incorrect, CaO (c) incorrect, Fe2O3 or FeO

(b) correct (d) correct
2.49 (a) potassium sulfide (c) ammonium phosphate

(b) cobalt(II) sulfate (d) calcium hypochlorite
2.50 (a) calcium acetate (c) aluminum hydroxide

(b) nickel(II) phosphate (d) potassium dihydrogen phosphate
2.51 (a) (NH4)2CO3 (d) AlPO4

(b) CaI2 (e) AgCH3CO2
(c) CuBr2
2.52 (a) Ca(HCO3)2 (d) K2HPO4

(b) KMnO4 (e) Na2SO3
(c) Mg(ClO4)2
2.53 Na2CO3 sodium carbonate NaI sodium iodide

BaCO3 barium carbonate BaI2 barium iodide
2.54 Mg3(PO4)2 magnesium phosphate Mg(NO3)2 magnesium nitrate

FePO4 iron(III) phosphate Fe(NO3)3 iron(III) nitrate
2.55 The force of attraction is stronger in NaF than in NaI because the distance between ion centers is smaller in
NaF (235 pm) than in NaI (322 pm).
2.56 The attractive forces are stronger in CaO because the ion charges are greater (+2/–2 in CaO and +1/–1 in
NaCl).
2.57 (a) nitrogen trifluoride (c) boron triiodide

(b) hydrogen iodide (d) phosphorus pentafluoride
2.58 (a) dinitrogen pentaoxide (c) oxygen difluoride

(b) tetraphosphorus trisulfide (d) xenon tetrafluoride
2.59 (a) SCl2 (b) N2O5 (c) SiCl4 (d) B2O3
27 27
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2.60 (a) BrF3 (d) P2F4

(b) XeF2 (e) C4H10
(c) N2H4
28 28
© 2015
website, website,
part.
27.0 g Al
2.61 (a) 2.5 mol Al · = 68 g Al
1 mol Al
55.85 g Fe
(b) 1.25 10–3 mol Fe · = 0.0698 g Fe
1 mol Fe
40.1 g Ca
(c) 0.015 mol Ca · = 0.60 g Ca
1 mol Ca
20.18 g Ne
(d) 653 mol Ne · = 1.32 104 g Ne 1
mol Ne
197.0 g Au
2.62 (a) 4.24 mol Au · = 835 g Au
4.003 g He
(b) 15.6 mol He · = 62.4 g He
1 mol He
195 g Pt
(c) 0.063 mol Pt · = 12 g Pt
1 mol Pt
244.7 g Pu
(d) 3.63 10–4 mol Pu · = 0.0888 g Pu 1
mol Pu
1 mol Cu
2.63 (a) 127.08 g Cu · 63. 546 g Cu = 1.9998 mol Cu
1 mol Li
(b) 0.012 g Li · = 1.7 10–3 mol Li
6.94 g Li
1g 1 mol Am
(c) 5.0 mg Am · 3
· = 2.1 10–5 mol Am
10 mg 243 g Am
1 mol Al
(d) 6.75 g Al · 26.98 g Al = 0.250 mol Al
1 mol Na
2.64 (a) 16.0 g Na · 22.99 g Na = 0.696 mol Na
1 mol Sn
(b) 0.876 g Sn · 118.7 g Sn = 7.38 10–3 mol Sn
1 mol Pt
(c) 0.0034 g Pt · = 1.7 10–5 mol Pt
195 g Pt
1 mol Xe
29 29
© 2015
website, website,
part.
(d) 0.983 g Xe · 131.3 g Xe = 7.4910–3 mol Xe
30 30
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2.65 Helium has the smallest molar mass and will have the largest number of atoms. Iron has the largest molar
mass and the smallest number of atoms.
23
1 mol He 6.0210 He atoms
1.0 g He · 4.00 g He · 1 mol He = 1.5 1023 He atoms
1.0 g Fe · 1 mol Fe · 6.021023 Fe atoms = 1.1 1022 Fe atoms

55.8 g Fe 1 mol Fe
1 mol K
2.66 0.10 g K · = 0.0026 mol K
39.0983 g K
1 mol Mo
0.10 g Mo · = 0.0010 mol Mo
95.96 g Mo
1 mol Cr
0.10 g Cr · = 0.0019 mol Cr
51.9961g Cr
1 mol Al
0.10 g Al · = 0.0037 mol Al
26.9815 g
0.0010 mol Mo < 0.0019 mol Cr < 0.0026 mol K < 0.0037 mol Al
1 mol Ca
2.67 3.99 g Ca · = 0.0996 mol Ca
40.078 g Ca
1 mol P
1.85 g P · = 0.0597 mol P
30.9737 g
1 mol O
4.14 g O · = 0.259 mol O
15.9994 g O
1 mol H
0.02 g H · = 0.02 mol H
1.00794 g H
0.02 mol H < 0.0597 mol P < 0.0996 mol Ca < 0.259 mol O
23
1 mol Ga 6.02 10 Ga atoms
2.68 52 g Ga · 69.7 g Ga · 1 mol Ga = 4.5 1023 Ga atoms
23
1 mol Al 6.02 10 Al atoms
9.5 g Al · 27.0 g Al · 1 mol Al = 2.1 1023 Al atoms
31 31
© 2015
website, website,
part.
Visit https://testbankpack.com
now to explore a rich
collection of testbank or
solution manual and enjoy
exciting offers!
23
6.022 10 As atoms
112 g As · 1 mol As · = 9.00 1023 As atoms
74.92 g As 1 mol As
Arsenic has the largest number of atoms in the mixture.
32 32
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2.69 (a) Fe2O3 159.69 g/mol

(b) BCl3 117.17 g/mol
(c) C6H8O6 176.13 g/mol
2.70 (a) Fe(C6H11O7)2 446.14 g/mol

(b) CH3CH2CH2CH2SH 90.19 g/mol
(c) C20H24N2O2 324.42 g/mol
2.71 (a) Ni(NO3)2·6H2O 290.79 g/mol

(b) CuSO4·5H2O 249.69 g/mol
2.72 (a) H2C2O4·2H2O 126.07 g/mol

(b) MgSO4·7H2O 246.48 g/mol
60.10 g C H OH
3 7
2.73 (a) 0.0255 mol C3H7OH· = 1.53 g C3H7OH
1 mol C3 H7OH
180.2 g C11 H16 O2

(b) 0.0255 mol C11H16O2 · = 4.60 g C11H16O2
1 mol C11 H16 O2
180.2 g C9 H8 O4
(c) 0.0255 mol C9H8O4 · = 4.60 g C9H8O4
1 mol C9 H8 O4
(d) 0.0255 mol (CH3)2CO · 58.08 g (CH 3 )2CO = 1.48 (CH3)2CO

1 mol (CH 3 )2CO
242.2 g C H O
14 10 4
2.74 (a) 0.123 mol C14H10O4 · = 29.8 g C14H10O4
1 mol C14 H10 O4
116.2 g C4 H8 N2 O2
(b) 0.123 mol C4H8N2O2 · = 14.3 g C4H8N2O2
1 mol C4 H8 N2 O2
102.2 g C5 H10 S
(c) 0.123 mol C5H10S · = 12.6 g C5H10S
1 mol C5 H10 S
191.3 g C12 H17 NO
(d) 0.123 mol C12H17NO · = 23.5 g C12H17NO
1 mol C12 H17 NO
2.751.00 kg SO3 · 103 g · 1 mol SO3 = 12.5 mol SO3

1 kg 80.06 g SO3
23
12.5 mol SO3 · 6.022 10 molecules = 7.52 10 molecules SO3
24
1 mol SO3
1 S atom
7.52 1024 molecules SO3 · 7.52 1024 molecules SO3 ·
33 33
© 2015
website, website,
part.
= 7.52 1024 S
1 SO3 molecule
atoms
3 O atoms
1 SO3 molecule
= 2.26 1025 O
atoms
34 34
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2 mol NH + 6.022 1023 NH ions

2.760.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · · 4 ions
23 + =
4 4
2.4 × 10 NH
+
1 mol (NH 4 ) 2 SO4 1 mol NH4
2 2
1 mol SO 6.022 1023 SO ions
0.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · = 4 · 4 = 1.2 × 1023 SO42- ions
1 mol (NH 4 ) 2 SO4 1 mol NH4
2 mol N 6.022 1023 N atoms

0.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · · = 2.4 × 1023 N atoms
1mol (NH4 )2SO4 1 mol N
8 mol H 6.022 1023 H atoms

0.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · · = 9.6 × 1023 H atoms
1mol (NH4 )2SO4 1 mol H
1 mol S 6.022 1023 S atoms

0.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · · = 1.2 × 1023 S atoms
1mol (NH4 )2SO4 1 mol S
4 mol O 6.022 1023 O atoms

0.20 mol (NH4)2SO4 · · = 4.8 × 1023 O atoms
1mol (NH4 )2SO4 1 mol O
2.77 Formula: C8H9N1O2
Molar mass: 151.16 g/mol
1 dose = 2 · 500 mg = 1 × 103 mg
1g 1mol 6.022 1023 molecules

1 × 103 mg · · · · = 4 × 1021 molecules
1000 mg 151.16 g 1mol
–3
2.78(a) 324 mg C9H8O4 · 1g · 1 mol C9 H8O4 = 1.80 10 mol C9H8O4
103 mg 180.2 g C9 H8O4
1g 1 mol NaHCO 3
3
1904 mg NaHCO3 · 10 mg · 84.007 g NaHCO3 = 0.02266 mol NaHCO3
–3
1000. mg C6H8O7 · 1g · 1 mol C6 H8O7 = 5.205 10 mol C6H8O7
103 mg 192.13 g C6 H8O7
6.022 1023 molecules
(b) 1.8010–3 mol C9H8O4 · = 1.08 1021 molecules
C9H8O4 1 mol C9 H8O4
207.2 g Pb 32.07 g S
35 35
© 2015
website, website,
part.
2.79 (a) 239.3 g PbS 239.3 g PbS

· 100% = 86.59% Pb · 100% = 13.40% S
(b) (3)(12.01) g C · 100% = 81.71% C (8)(1.008) g H · 100% = 18.29% H

44.096 g C3H8 44.096 g C3H8
36 36
© 2015
website, website,
part.
(10)(12.01) g C (14)(1.008) g H
· 100% = 9.395% H
(c) 150.21 g C10 H14O · 100% = 79.95% C 150.21 g C10 H14O
16.00 g O
150.21 g C10 H14O · 100% = 10.65% O
(8)(12.01) g C (10)(1.008) g H
2.80 (a) · 100% = 57.82% C · 100% = 6.066% H
166.18 g C8H10 N2O2
166.18 g C8H10 N2O2
(2)(14.01) g N (2)(16.00) g O
· 100% = 16.86% N · 100% = 19.26% O
166.18 g C8H10 N2O2 166.18 g C8H10 N2O2
(10)(12.01) g C (20)(1.008) g H
· 100% = 12.90% H
(b) 156.26 g C10 H20O · 100% = 76.86% C 156.26 g C10 H20O
16.00 g O
156.26 g C10 H20O · 100% = 10.24% O
58.93 g Co (2)(35.45) g Cl
· 100% = 29.80% Cl
(c) 237.93 g CoCl2 6 H2O · 100% = 24.77% Co 237.93 g CoCl2 6 H2O
(12)(1.008) g H (6)(16.00) g O
· 100% = 40.35% O
237.93 g CoCl2 6 H2O · 100% = 5.084% H 237.93 g CoCl2 6 H2O
63.55 g Cu
2.81 95.62 g CuS ·100% = 66.46% Cu
100.00 g CuS
10.0 g Cu · = 15.0 g CuS
47.87 g Ti
2.82 · 100% = 31.55% Ti
151.71 g FeTiO3
100.00 g FeTiO3
750 g Ti · = 2.4 103 g FeTiO3
30.35 g Ti
2.83 Empirical formula mass = 59.04 g/mol

118.1 g/mol =2
59.04 g/mol
The molecular formula is (C2H3O2)2, or C4H6O4
2.84 Empirical formula mass = 58.06 g/mol 116.1 g/mol =2

58.06 g/mol
The molecular formula is (C2H4NO)2, or C4H8N2O2
2.85 Empirical formula Molar mass (g/mol) Molecular formula

26.0/13.0 = 2 C2H2
116.1/29.0 = 4 C4H4O4
37 (CH2)8 = C8H16 37
© 2015
website, website,
part.
Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
distance from the spectator’s eye would otherwise have suggested.
Moreover, in the sculptures, as in the carving of the mouldings, the varying
quantities of light were considered. The mouldings on the outside of a
temple in full sunlight were differently planned from those in the interior;
and the shadow cast by the cornices was taken into account in graduating
the relief of the sculptures in the metopes and pediments.
Nor was the actual work done by artists, but under their supervision by
pupils and masons. From the records of payments made to the sculptors
who worked on the Erechtheion it appears that they were ordinary masons,
some of them not even citizens, who were paid for each figure the sum of
60 drachms, or 12 dollars!
Finally, the decoration of a Greek Temple comprised not only sculpture,
but also painting. A large part of every Doric temple was covered with
strong, bright colours, while certain prominent details were treated with
elaborate patterns. The figures of the sculpture also were painted and
relieved against a background of contrasted colour.
It has been discovered that the triglyphs were painted blue and the
metopes red and that the mouldings were decorated with ornament in red,
blue, green, and gold. The walls and the columns were probably stained
yellow or buff, perhaps by the use of wax melted on the surface (encaustic).
Asymmetries or Refinements.—It might seem that, in the various
particulars we have noted, Hellenic intellect and feeling had exhausted the
possibilities of refinement. But there is yet another instance, which was first
revealed by the detailed measurements of Hellenic temples made
independently by two Englishmen, Francis Cranmer Penrose and John
Pennethorne, and by a German architect, Joseph Hoffer. The results were
published in 1838 and in 1851, and have been corroborated by other
students. They are known as architectural “refinements” or “asymmetries.”
It had been assumed that, since the form of the temple type was
apparently symmetrical, it also involved absolute symmetry of details; that
geometrical regularity and mathematical accuracy were the necessary and
natural conditions of the architectural design. By those investigators,
however, it was discovered that though the principles of geometry and
mathematics were the foundation of the planning and designing, regularity
and accuracy were purposely avoided; and that so far from the details being
symmetrical they exhibit intentional asymmetries.
One of these irregularities is the substitution of curved for straight lines.
We have already mentioned the entasis or swell in the vertical contour of
the column—a fact not observed by modern architects until 1810; but
curvature is also found in the horizontal lines of the stylobate and the
architrave, frieze, and cornice, and in the gable lines of the pediments. And
since these were discovered other variations of equal importance and
significance have been found.
“In the Parthenon, for instance,” (the quotation is from the writings of
Professor William H. Goodyear) “surfaces or members which are set true to
perpendicular are most exceptional. Perhaps the end walls are the only
exception. All the columns lean inward about three inches in thirty feet
toward the centre of the building. The side walls lean inward. The antæ, or
flat pilasters at the angles of the ends of the walls, lean forward one unit in
eighty-two units. The faces of the architrave and frieze lean backward,
whereas the acroteria, the face of the cornice and the face of the fillet
between architrave and frieze lean forward. Furthermore, the columns and
capitals of the Parthenon are of unequal size, and the widths of the metopes
and the intercolumnar spacings are also unequal.”
The discovery of these variations was pooh-poohed by architects who
had been trained to believe that “correct” architecture depended upon
geometrical regularity and mathematical accuracy. They dismissed them
lightly as “mason’s errors.” But this will not hold for three reasons. Firstly,
these asymmetries only occur in the finest examples, where the design and
the details are of superior refinement and the skill of the masons most
unmistakable. Secondly, the number of variations increases pro rata with
the superiority of the design, reaching their maximum in the Parthenon.
And, thirdly, in cases which are unquestionably due to mason’s errors the
amount of the variation is practically negligible. Is it likely, for example,
that the masons who brought the two ends of the Parthenon within one
quarter of an inch of being exactly equal in width, would have been so
careless as to let the presumably horizontal lines curve up four inches on the
sides of the buildings and two inches at its ends? Or, again, would they have
committed so flagrant an error as giving the stylobate a convex curve
upward, since it necessitated a corresponding curve to the base of each
column, a most difficult and delicate operation of cutting? The perfect
adjustment of these two curves, by the way, is one of many arguments
against the theory that these variations were caused by settlements in the
foundations or, in the case of the Parthenon, by the explosion which
wrecked it in 1687, when it was being used by the Turks as a powder
magazine.
The fact having been established that these variations were intentional,
how are they to be explained? A generally accepted explanation of the
curvatures in place of straight lines has been that they were intended to
correct an optical effect of curvature in the opposite direction. Thus, if the
contour of a column shaft were a straight line, it would appear to the eye to
curve inward; similarly, the horizontal lines of the stylobate and entablature
would appear to sag downward. Accordingly, the “refinements” were
designed as optical corrections of optical effects of irregularity; in other
words, geometrical effect is supposed to have been sought by departures
from geometric fact.
This, however, would not explain the other variations that have been
noted. Moreover, it is contradicted even in the case of curvatures by a
discovery of Professor Giovannoni of Rome, that the façade of the Temple
at Uri has a curvature in plan.[3] The columns, that is to say, are not set to a
straight line but to a curve which is concave to the exterior; consequently
the entablature is correspondingly curved, the effect of which to the eye as
it looks up is the very one that it was explained the architects strove to
avoid—a sag downward from the ends. In this case they deliberately
designed the façade to produce the effect.
This explanation of optical corrections, then, as well as others, have been
proved erroneous by Professor William H. Goodyear, who has made a life-
long study of the subject and carried his investigations also into Gothic
architecture, in which, as we shall see, he has discovered numerous
instances of refinements and asymmetries. His explanation, supported by a
wealth of conclusive evidence which is set forth in his “Greek
Refinements,” is that the motive was æsthetic. The refinements were
modulations designed to please the eye by avoiding the inartistic effects
produced by formal monotony. They were planned to do away with the
monotony and rigidity that result from geometrical regularity and
mathematical accuracy and to introduce a suggestion of elasticity. They
imparted to the structure something of the irregularity that characterises
organic growth. It is because, with rare exceptions, they are not found in
modern classical buildings, that the latter appear by comparison so stiff and
formal.
These asymmetries, in fact, were intended to offset the liability of the
beauty’s becoming “faultily faultless, icily regular, splendidly null, dead
perfection, no more.”
With few exceptions the Hellenic temple was oriented; its four sides
facing exactly the four points of the compass, the principal entrance being
on the east. It opened into the cella which was usually divided into what
may be called a nave and side aisles by two rows of columns which carried
smaller columns that supported the pitch of the roof. Where the cella was
narrow, as in the Temple of Apollo Epicurios (“The Helper”) at Bassæ,
near Phigaleia, the rows of columns were replaced by half-columns,
attached to projections from side walls. The cella was occupied by the
statue of the deity, which in the case of the Parthenon was the Athene
Parthenos, the Maiden Athene, one of the most renowned works of Phidias.
The draped figure of the goddess was represented standing, armed with
helmet, spear and shield, supporting in one hand a Wingèd Victory. The
statue was about forty feet high and of the kind known as
“chryselephantine,” the draperies and accessories being of gold plates, the
flesh parts ivory, with precious stones inserted in the eyes.
Behind this statue was the entrance to a small room, situated between the
cella and the opisthodomos, an exceptional feature from which the name of
the temple was derived. It was the Parthenon proper, or Virgin’s Chamber,
which seems to have been used as a treasury. Its ceiling was supported by
four Ionic columns.
The Ionic order in conjunction with the Doric was also employed in the
Propylæa or monumental gateway of the Acropolis. This masterpiece of
Mnesicles presents an irregularity of plan, exhibiting the Hellenic
architect’s readiness to adapt his design to the peculiarities of the site.
While Doric columns mark the exterior, Ionic were used in the interior to
dignify the central passageway. A similar use of this order for interior
embellishment was adopted by Ictinus, the chief architect of the Parthenon,
in his otherwise Doric design of the Temple of Apollo Epicurios.
On the other hand, the Ionic order was employed on the exterior of the
Erechtheion, another work of Mnesicles also irregular in plan. It occupies a
sloping site on the Acropolis, where an older temple, burnt by the Persians,
had stood. Spoils of the Persian conquest were preserved in it with other
relics, held in special veneration. The nucleus of the design is a cella
without colonnades (apteral), the sanctuary of Athena Polias (the City’s
Guardian) and of Erechtheus (a mythic hero of the Athenians) and the
Ocean-god, Poseidon. The exterior is distinguished by two Ionic porticoes,
and by a third, a smaller one, in which the columns are replaced by
caryatides, six draped female figures whose heads support the architrave.
All these figures face south, the three to the west resting their weight on the
right legs; the three eastern on the left—in each case the outer legs—thus
giving to the outer contour of their bodies the effect of entasis.
Another Ionic example on the Acropolis is the Temple of Athene Nike
(Victory), known as the Temple of Nike Apteros; the term “Wingless,”
however, not describing the statue of the goddess but, as used above, the
style of the design—without colonnades.
Theatres.—Only second in importance to the Hellenic temples were the

theatres. Both served as memorials of the ancient traditions of the race and
as an incentive to higher citizenship. For the drama, which had its origin in
religious observances, was a civic institution, maintained by the state and
free to all citizens.
The origin of the Greek drama is to be found in the primitive worship of
Dionysos, the god of productiveness, and to the last the Greek stage and
auditorium perpetuated in their form some trace of their religious origin.
The nucleus was an altar consecrated to Dionysos. In earliest times each
family may have erected its own altar, presided over by the father of the
family as priest. Later each community would have its official priest, and on
the god’s feast-day all the villagers would move in procession to the
common altar, headed by the priest and a choir of singers, trained by him.
The altar reached, the priest would mount the pedestal, surrounded by the
choir, while the body of worshippers disposed themselves around the spot.
The priest would recite the greatness of the god and at intervals the choir of
voices would chant the dithyrambic song, moving around the altar and
accompanying the song with rhythmic movement of body and limbs.
From this root of a religious drama in time grew successive stems. The
prowess of some hero would be adopted as a theme. At first the priest, or it
may be some wandering poet, would narrate the story; later he would treat
it in the first person, impersonating the hero, sometimes engaging in
dialogue with the chorus. Still later, other personages in the story would be
separately impersonated, and so the scope of the dramatic representation
developed.
Meanwhile the affair still maintained a semi-religious character; the
place of presentation was still around the altar of Dionysos and the chorus
was retained, taking its part in the action with explanation and comment,
still delivered, however, in dithyrambic measure and with accompaniments
of rhythmic gesture. The platform of the altar being limited in space, the
dialogue was usually confined to two actors at a time, though a third was
sometimes allowed. If there were other characters involved, these actors
would often “double” the parts; disguising themselves by change of
costume, especially by the use of masks. This demanded some kind of a
screen behind which the actors could change their costumes and also wait
until their presence was required. Skins hung upon poles would at first
serve the purpose, or a skene or tent, from which we derive our word scene,
might be used. Whichever it were, it would interfere with the view of the
action from the back and so draw the audience to the “front.”
The most important remains of Hellenic theatres are the Theatre of

Dionysos,[4] cut out of the side of the Acropolis, and the theatre at
Epidauros, in Argolis, Greece. The plan of the theatre of Dionysos is that
of a semi-circle, the ends of which are prolonged for a short distance in a
direction at right angles to the front of the skene. Within the horseshoe was
the circular orchestra, still whole at Epidauros, in which the main action
was carried on by actors and chorus. A different plan is given by the Roman
architect, Vitruvius. It is to be noted, however, that Vitruvius lived in the
reign of Augustus, by which time what was pure Hellenic had become
modified by foreign influences into Hellenistic. He relates, for example,
that in his time the height of the logeion or speaking platform—the stage of
to-day—was from 10 to 12 feet. In earlier times, including probably the
period of the Classic drama, the logeion was the platform around the altar,
supplemented possibly by a platform two or three feet high extending
across the front of the skene, from which, at certain points in the play, some,
at least, of the actors spoke. This platform, being in front of the scene and
enclosed at the sides by projections of the latter, was called the proskenion,
from which is derived our word proscenium with its different meaning.
By the time that the Hellenic theatre had evolved into a permanent
structure, the skene, originally a temporary screen, took the form of an
architectural background, some ten feet high, with a central door for the
entrances of the actors. But the idea of the original screen was perhaps
retained in the row of columns which stood a little in front of the skene, and
could be used, if needed, for the hanging of curtains or even of painted
cloths. Meanwhile, the roof of the portico, which extended from the
columns to the skene, could be utilised by the actors at certain stages of the
drama.[5]
The interest of the discussion raised by Vitruvius’ description consists in
the question how far the actors mingled with or were separated from the
chorus, which continued to occupy the orchestra or circle on the floor of the
auditorium, corresponding to the place of the orchestra stalls in a modern
theatre. The orchestra of a Greek theatre was originally the sole “stage,” but
gradually, as the dramas involved more complexity of scenes, the actors
would vary their position between the orchestra and the proscenium; and
later, in Hellenistic times, as the religious origin of the drama was forgotten
and the use of a chorus began to fall into abeyance, the use of the
proscenium would increase.
Finally, when the Romans began to imitate the Greek drama, they
dropped the chorus; the acting was confined to the proscenium, and the
orchestra no longer needed for the play, became a part of the auditorium,
reserved for distinguished spectators. The Roman theatre, in fact, like our
own, represented the complete separation of the audience and the stage.
Odeion.—Supplementing the theatre was the Odeion or concert hall,
which was constructed on the same general lines but distinguished by the
addition of a roof for acoustic purposes. The oldest known is the Skias at
Sparta, so called from its roof resembling the top of a parasol. The Odeion
of Pericles, which served as a model for subsequent halls, was built on the
southeastern slope of the Acropolis, its roof being made in imitation of the
tent of Xerxes and constructed of the masts of Persian vessels, captured at
the battle of Salamis. The most magnificent example, however, was erected
A.D. 162 on the southwest slope, by a wealthy citizen, Herodes Atticus, in
memory of his wife. Its ceiling is said to have been composed of beams of
cedar, carved with ornament, while decorations in the form of paintings and
other works of art embellished the interior, which had accommodation for
eight thousand persons.
CHAPTER III
ROMAN CIVILISATION
Such empire as Hellas achieved was succeeded by the Roman Empire. The
earlier, as we have seen, was an empire loosely founded on kinship of race,
ideals, and character, and on common interests of commerce. It was an
empire of individualism; preserving the individuality of cities and their
individual states, producing a few men of rare individuality and, as it spread
throughout the Mediterranean, planting colonies which maintained their
independence both against the Motherland of Hellas and the people in their
immediate surroundings. It was, from the first, an empire of the spirit and,
as such, survived its physical dissolution and has maintained its dominion
over the human mind even to the present time.
On the contrary, the Roman Empire, in so far as it succeeded, was an
empire of constructive organisation. It grew, cell by cell, each added cell
becoming gradually impregnated with the life-principle of the earliest one,
so that every part of the unwieldy body was an organic part of the whole.
Thus, in time, each independent city and its adjoining community, alien
races and huge slices of foreign territory, became gradually absorbed into
the practical system of government that originated with the little settlement
of Latins which first occupied the Palatine Hill and then extended its
authority over the seven hills of Rome. Part after part became absorbed into
the system of the Lex Romana and enjoyed the benefits of the Pax Romana.
The Roman citizenship, judiciously extended over the whole empire,
carried with it substantial rights and equally substantial duties. The
provinces of the empire contributed men of learning, generals, and
statesmen to the central government. In time some of the provinces, notably
those of Spain and Southern France, became more characteristically Roman
than Rome herself. They had absorbed her system and her culture, and, far
removed from the petty intrigues which convulsed the capital, reached a
degree of civilisation that represented the finest product of the Roman ideal;
an ideal that included individual uprightness, a sense of service and self-
sacrifice for the common weal, and a high regard for order. It was a
practical ideal, little concerned with abstractions, not devoted to excessive
refinement, but centred on the effectual accomplishment of the individual
and collective requirements of everyday life.
It is true that this ideal was never fully achieved. This is only to say that
the ideal was truly human and therefore at the mercy of human chances and
weaknesses. Moreover, that it was really an ideal; a principle of life, that is
to say, which by reason of its bigness was only possible of partial
achievement. And if the Romans failed in achieving theirs, they failed
nobly, and with sufficient success to have left behind them a legacy of law
and order and constructive principles of government that, like the cultural
ideals of the Hellenes, survive to the present time.
And the Roman Empire played a part in the progress of the world, more
immediately necessary than that of Hellas. The latter’s Empire of Spirit was
in advance of its age. The world outside of the scattered outposts of Hellas
was too rude, too backward in the very necessaries of life, to accept its
message of beauty. Recognising this, the Hellenes called all other races and
nations barbarians and held aloof from them. The Romans, on the contrary,
absorbed the aliens, instilled into them the rudiments of their own
civilisation, while taking advantage of any good trait in the people
themselves, so that they helped them to rise out of themselves to a higher
plane of living. In a lawless world they became the great exponents of
order, the upbuilders and engineers of a system of organised society, and so
firmly did they lay the foundations and so strongly did they build that,
although subsequent hordes of barbarians overthrew the dominion of the
empire of Rome and laid waste many of the visible signs of her building,
the destroyers were gradually absorbed into her system and became its
continuers.
Therefore, when we consider the Romans specifically in relation to
architecture, we look back to them as tireless and prodigious builders,
constructors, and engineers, whose sense of beauty in architecture, as well
as their aspirations in all branches of higher culture, were derived from the
Hellenes. Their respect for the latter was such that so long as possible they
tried to treat them as an independent power, with whom they could pursue
the mutual advantages of commerce. Gradually, however, the tangle of
politics made absorption necessary, and after a series of invasions Hellas
herself became a province of the Roman Empire.
War, in those days, as for centuries after, involved the barbarous practice
of looting, and the Romans, with their shrewd instinct for acquiring what
they most needed for their own development, bore back home in increasing
quantity the treasures of architectural and sculptural art. Later, as the power
of Hellas dwindled, Rome became the centre to which Hellenic artists and
scholars flocked.
The conquest of Hellas and gradual absorption of a part of her culture
occupied the second century before the Christian era and the earlier years of
the first. By this time, however, Rome herself had become a prey to the
rivalries of political factions, beginning with the conspiracy of Sulla and
ending with the civil war that followed upon the assassination of Julius
Cæsar. The latter’s great-nephew, Octavianus, in conjunction with Marc
Antony, conquered Brutus and Cassius at Philippi in Macedonia and
Octavianus assumed authority over the West, while Antony established
himself as ruler in the East. But his infatuation for Cleopatra raised the
suspicion in Rome that he intended to marry her and make himself despot
of an Oriental empire with Alexandria as its capital. War was declared
against him as a national enemy and he was defeated at Actium, B.C. 31. The
authority of Octavianus was now supreme. Republicanism, as a practical
form of government, was dead. Conditions demanded one-man rule and
Octavianus, in B.C. 27, resigned his office as Triumvir and received from the
Senate the title of Augustus, which hitherto had been reserved for the gods.
During this period of struggle the Hellenic influence had been rapidly
growing. The sons of the ruling class had Greek tutors; many studied in the
schools of Athens and Rhodes, and Roman writers began to emulate the
Greek authors. Cæsar published his Commentaries on the Gallic War and on
the Civil War; Sallust wrote on the Conspiracy of Catiline and the
Jugurthine War and Cornelius Nepos compiled biographies of eminent men.
Cicero published under the name of “Philippics” the speeches which he
made against Antony in the Senate, as well as “Letters” to various friends
on the topics of the times, while Lucretius composed in verse a treatise on
the “Nature of the World” and Varro was the author of an encyclopædic
work relating to the history, geography, agriculture, law, literature,
philology, philosophy, and religion of the Romans. To Varro also had been
assigned by Julius Cæsar the collection of a public Library of Greek and
Roman writers.
The enthusiasm for literature was encouraged by Augustus and his
minister, Mycæenas, who saw in it a means of allaying the bitterness of
party strife. To this, the “Augustan” or “Golden Age,” as the writers called
it in flattery of their patron, belong Horace, Livy, and Virgil.
In an effort also to lead the people back to the honourable simplicity of
their forefathers, Augustus revived the ancient religious ceremonies and
restored the temples. He became chief pontiff and, being regarded as the
son of the deified Julius—in reality, his great-nephew—was treated almost
as a divinity in Rome and deified by the provincials who built temples in
his honour.
It was in the Augustan Age that Roman architecture virtually
commenced and its developments are associated with Imperial rule. Of the
period immediately preceding the new era Mommsen writes as follows:
“There was in the world as Cæsar found it much of the noble heritage of
past centuries and an infinite abundance of pomp and glory, but little spirit,
still less taste and least of all true delight in life. It was indeed, an old
world; and even the richly gifted patriotism of Cæsar could not make it
young again.”
Rome, the heart of the Empire, was corrupt. The ruling class coveted
pensions from the public exchequer to be spent on luxurious living; while
the mass of the populace clamoured for “panem et circenses”—feeding and
shows at the public charge. To satisfy their hunger both classes would have
taxed the provinces. But among the chief duties of the emperors were the
development of the resources of the provinces and the protection of the
frontiers; and, while the best of the emperors performed these functions
from high motives, even the worst found it politic to court the growing
power of the provinces. Thus, the main vitality of the empire was in its
extremities, and, although the emperors beautified Rome, they also
encouraged public works of utility and beauty in the provinces. To this end
a law was passed, permitting municipalities to receive bequests and gifts
from private individuals. In the liberality with which wealthy provincials
enriched their communities, Dr. Ferrero, the latest historian of Rome, has
seen a parallel to the munificent public gifts of American millionaires.
Accordingly, this great era of Roman building left its impress not only
upon Italy, but in Greece and northward as far as the Danube, in Asia
Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, along the whole Northern coast of Africa,
and in Spain, France, and Great Britain as far as the Firth of Forth. It was
distinguished not only by the magnitude of the operations but also by their
character.
Whereas in Egypt the architectural works had consisted of temples and
tombs; and in Hellas these had been supplemented by theatres and odeia;
while Assyria and Persia left their memorials in palaces, those of the Roman
Empire embraced all of these types and many more. The Romans applied
architecture to the practical needs of everyday life, and reinforced it with
engineering. They overlaid the Empire with fine trunk-roads, many of
which survive to-day; constructed sewers; spanned rivers with bridges;
conveyed water in countless miles of aqueducts; erected fora and market-
places, triumphal arches, temples, palaces, villas, baths, basilicas, theatres,
and hippodromes; providing alike for the necessities of life, the needs of
government, and the amusements and luxuries of living.
To accomplish so prodigious an amount of building the Romans
systematised the methods of construction in regard to both the labour and
the material. The labour was mainly of an unskilled kind, including soldiers
of the legions, slaves, and subjects liable through debt or other causes to
statute labour. This employment of unskilled labour was made possible by
the Roman habit of carrying the principle of repetition of motives to its
utmost limit, and also by the methods of construction which they invented.
This was the extended use of concrete. During the Republic the Romans
had followed the Greek method of building with large blocks of stone,
unconnected with mortar. Their practical spirit, however, urged them to
make a more economical use of materials and instead of composing the
walls entirely of blocks of stone or marble, they used these or bricks as a
facing, filling in the thickness of the wall with small fragments of stone
mixed with lime or mortar.
They had been led to this practice by the existence of pozzolana, a
volcanic product of clean, sandy earth, found in Rome and in greater
quantities at Pozzuoli on the Bay of Naples, which, when mixed with lime,
formed a concrete of exceptional hardness, strength, and durability.
Material, approximating the properties of pozzolana and lime, was
procurable in all parts of the Empire. Accordingly the use of this method of
construction gave a similarity to Roman building everywhere.
While the chief, and almost sole building material in Greece was marble,
the geological formation of Italy supplied stone as well as marble and
plentiful supplies of clay, which was converted into terra-cotta or bricks.
The bricks were of two shapes: either square, from 1 to 2 feet in size and 2
inches thick or triangular in plan and of about 1½ inches in thickness. The
latter were especially used for the facing of the walls, their pointed ends
being driven into the concrete to form the smooth surfaces, while at the
corners the points projected. In Rome itself the following materials were
available: travertine, a hard limestone from Tivoli; tufa, a volcanic
substance of which the hills of Rome are mainly composed; and peperino, a
stone of volcanic origin from Mount Albano.
While Roman architecture was developed under the stimulus of Greek

art and culture it probably owes its origin to the example of the Etruscans.
The origin of this race is uncertain, but its own traditions ascribe it to
Lydia in Asia Minor, whence it may have passed during that general
migration from Hellas into Italy about B.C. 1000. It was for long the
dominant power in Italy, extending at various times over a territory that
reached from the Tiber to the Apennines, and southward into Campania.
This gave the Etruscans command of the Tyrrhenian Sea and made them
commercial rivals of the Carthagenians. Their enmity toward the rising city
of Rome would be natural and some authorities believe that the reign of the
Tarquin kings was a period of Etruscan domination. Then the Romans
expelled the tyrants, established a republic of their own, and by degrees
wore down the power of the Etruscans, who had become enervated through
increase of luxury. Their civilisation long antedated that of the Romans. The
earliest remains of art, found in Etruria, are now believed to have been
imported from Hellas; but the tombs have revealed a quantity of later art
objects which prove this people to have been skilful in the modelling and
colouring of terra-cotta, in mural paintings, jewellery, and household
adornments.
“The houses of the earliest period, to judge by the burial urns, known
from their shape as ‘hut-urns,’ were small single room constructions of
rectangular plan, similar to certain types of the capanne used by the
shepherds to-day. Probably the walls were wattled and the roofs were
certainly thatched, for the urns show plainly the long beams fastened
together at the top and hanging from the ridge down each side.”
(Encyclopædia Britannica, “Etruria.”) Tombs erected even later than the
fifth century B.C. were cut in imitation of a most simple form of post and
beam construction. The elements of the decoration, such as capitals,
mouldings, rosettes, patterns, etc., were borrowed from Greece, Egypt, and
elsewhere.
The architectural remains comprise tombs, city walls, gateways, bridges,
and aqueducts, the walls of which are remarkable for their cyclopean
masonry, while the general character of the construction resembles the early
work of Tiryns and Mycenæ.
No example remains of Etruscan temples, but Vitruvius has described
them. The plan was nearly square and the cella was divided into three
chambers, since it was in groups of three that the Etruscans worshipped
their deities. The columns represented in rude form the Doric order, set so
far apart that it is concluded they were surmounted by beams of timber. A
further distinction of the Etruscan temple, adopted by the Romans, was the
replacing of the stylobate by a podium. This was a continuous pedestal or
low wall on which the columns were carried. It was approached in front by
a flight of steps, enclosed between the prolongation of the side-walls of the
podium. The most famous example was the Temple of Jupiter on the
Capitoline Hill, dedicated B.C. 509, which contained three chambers, for the
statues of Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. It was destroyed by fire B.C. 83, and
rebuilt by Sulla, who brought over for the purpose some of the Corinthian
columns from the temple of Zeus Olympius in Athens. (See p. 122.)
Until recently the great sewer, or “Cloaca Maxima,” of Rome,
constructed about B.C. 578, has been attributed to the Etruscans and
considered a proof that they introduced the use of the arch to the Romans.
But in 1903, when excavating the Forum, Commendatore Boni proved that
the drain was originally uncovered and that the arch, which consists of three
rings of voussoirs, each 2 feet 6 inches high, was added at the end of the
Republic. “Thus the honour, not of discovering the arch, for it was known
in the East, as we noted, but of popularising its use, does not belong to the
Etrurians, though they did use it at a comparatively late time for city gates,
as at Volterra.” (Encyclopædia Britannica, “Etruria.”)
Following Augustus, the emperors under whom Roman architecture
chiefly flourished were: Nero (A.D. 54-69), Vespasian (69-79), Trajan (98-
117), Hadrian (137-138), Septimus Severus (193-211), Caracalla (211-217),
and Diocletian (284-305). By Constantine (306-337) were inaugurated two
changes of policy, which affected the destinies of the world. For by granting
toleration to all religions he raised Christianity to equal footing with
paganism and thus paved the way for the power of the Church; and in
establishing his capital at Byzantium took the first step in the partition of
the Empire into East and West. Aided by his vigorous efforts, architecture,
which had declined, enjoyed a measure of revival, in which, as we shall see
later, the Church began to play a conspicuous part.
With the commencement of the fifth century, A.D., began the irruption of
Barbarians. Attila’s Huns swept like a scourge over Europe, while the
German tribes conquered the provinces in turn and occupied them. In 455
Rome was sacked by the Vandals. In 476 Odoacer was proclaimed by his
troops King of Italy, and thus the Western part of the Empire was finally
separated from the Eastern. This is the date selected to mark the “Fall” of
the Roman Empire. Meanwhile the steady decline of the power of the
emperors had been long in process and was accompanied by a
corresponding increase in the power of the Popes. Henceforth, during the
“Dark Ages” of civil confusion, the influence and authority of the Church
were the chief sources of social as well as religious organisation.
The Roman ideal of civilisation received its most characteristic

architectural expression in the several fora, beginning with the oldest—the
Forum Romanum. From ancient times it was the heart of the city; the centre
of civil activity; the scene of some of the most stirring incidents in the
growth of Rome; in later times the nucleus of the pomp and pride of the
Empire. Here at some time was erected a cylindrical monument in three
tiers, the Umbilicus or Navel of Rome, and hard by it stood the Milliarium,
a marble column, sheathed in bronze and inscribed with the names and
distances of the chief cities on the great trunk-roads that radiated throughout
the Empire from the thirty-seven gates of Rome.
Between these two monuments extended a platform, decorated with the
bronze beaks of conquered vessels and hence called the Rostra, from which
any citizen could speak who had aught to say concerning the commonweal.
For it faced the Comitium or open space, which from earliest times had
been the meeting place of the General Assembly of the people. It is true that
the voice of the people was too often dominated by the Patrician class
whose Curia or Senate House overlooked the Comitium; but the Comitium
continued to represent, at least, the theory of Roman Government and to be
the veritable nucleus of the Roman Forum.
Since the Forum embodied the ideals and the progress of Rome, its
architectural aspects were continually changing throughout the more than
one thousand years of Rome’s vicissitudes. But without attempting to
follow these changes—many of which are shrouded in obscurity—let us try
to picture the Forum in its general aspects and particularly as the
embodiment of the Roman ideal.
The ancient citadel was the Capitoline Hill on which in early times had
been erected the temple already mentioned to the three divinities of Male
and Female Power and of Wisdom—Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva. It
corresponded to the Acropolis of Athens and her Parthenon. But whereas
the Parthenon was the nucleus of the Hellenic ideal, as embodied in
architectural glory—the embodiment of an ideal, detached and lifted up
above the common life—the formal grandeur of Rome descended from the
Capitoline Hill and occupied the low ground that separated it from the
Palatine, so that it might identify itself with the practical, everyday ideals of
the city.
And, first, for the purely practical. The southern side of the Forum was
in early times bordered with the tabernæ or wooden booths of the butchers
and other produce merchants, while on the north were the shops of the gold-
and silversmiths, and money changers. The Forum, in fact, was the central
market of Rome and came to be its financial centre, and, as a necessary
result, the centre also of legal and judicial procedure. In later times, as the
volume and intricacies of business increased, the tabernæ were replaced by
basilicas, which included halls of justice and of exchange for merchants.
Meanwhile, let us try to picture the Forum as the embodiment of Roman
ideals.
It was bounded on both sides by the Via Sacra, or Sacred Way; the two
forks uniting near the foot of the Palatine Hill, around which the Sacred
Way continued to its junction with the Appian Way. Its stones were sacred
because they had been trod by the countless hosts of Rome’s victorious
armies, returning in triumphal procession to pay their homage to the deities
of Male and Female Power and of Wisdom upon the Capitol.
As the soldiers swept out of the Appian Way, they would skirt the spot,
where in later times arose the Colosseum, and the roadway was spanned by
the Arch of Constantine, and a little farther on by the Arch of Titus. From
this the road advanced in an easterly direction and then turned north.
Then from earliest times two objects would greet the victors’ eyes. Upon
the right stood the arch of two-headed Janus, god of gates and doors. It was
all but a certainty that its two doors would be standing open; for, although
this army was returning victorious, there were others almost continuously
engaged on the frontiers of the empire. So the soldiers, glutted with fighting
and hungry for the sight of their loved ones, would turn more eagerly to the
left, where rose the circular temple of Vesta, guardian of the home and
hearth. It was the symbol of the ideal of sane and simple home life, on
which the greatness of Rome was founded, and as the Vestal Virgins
thronged the steps of their convent or atrium, hard by the temple, the eagles
would be lowered and every bronzed warrior would salute the maiden
priestesses, who, in their absence, had kept perpetually alive the sacred fire.
Just beyond this spot in later times Cæsar Augustus erected a Triumphal
Arch. Meanwhile, from Rome’s early days the victorious hosts would next
defile past the Temple of Castor and Pollux, memorial of the victory gained
at Lake Regillus with the help of these twin gods. Close by it came to be
erected the Temple of Cæsar, in front of which the great Julius caused a
rostrum to be placed, from the steps of which the oration over his dead body
was spoken by Marc Antony.
At this spot the veterans would enter the Forum proper, welcomed by the
cheers of the merchants; in old times, from the fronts of their booths and
later from the porticoes of the Basilica Æmilia on the right and the Basilica
Julia on the left. Then, both early and late in Rome’s history, would be
reached the ancient Temple of Saturn, god of seed growing and the bounties
of the soil, a god of meaning to the soldiers, for many a veteran had been
left behind in distant lands, planted upon farms that were to consolidate the
power and prosperity of the Empire. Moreover, in some of the chambers of
the Temple, which formed the official Treasury of Rome, a part of their
spoils of war would be deposited.
The procession by this time is filing past the Comitium, filled with
enthusiastic crowds, while orators welcome it from the rostra and the
Senators are ranged in ranks upon the steps of the Curia. The roar of
welcome is still in the ears of the host as it begins the ascent of the Capitol,
passing under the Arch of Septimus Severus, if the date be after A.D. 203.
Midway of the ascent, it passes the Temple of Concord, memorial of the
termination of the internecine struggle between the Patricians and the Plebs;
skirts the Tabularium, wherein the archives of the Empire were preserved,
and finally reaches the summit of the Capitol.
Let us take one glance back before the picture fades. The scene is superb
but not without confusion. The Romans paid no attention to orientation;
consequently there is little uniformity in the placing of the several
structures. They vary not only in size and design, but also in the direction
which they face. In the contracted space the various edifices seem crowded.
Indeed, the conjectured restoration of the Roman Forum and vicinity
suggests rather a medley of magnificence.
But even in this respect the character of this heart of Rome, lying
between the Capitoline and Palatine hills, symbolised the magnificent
variety of elements that composed the Empire. One may find some parallel
to Rome’s confusion of appearances in the variety and, for the most part,
lack of an organic lay-out in the modern London, the present mother-city of
an Empire, founded, like the Roman, upon commerce, and like it in having
grown, cell by cell, transcending it, however, not only in size but in
grandeur. For the policy of the British Empire has gradually evolved
beyond the Roman, substituting for the process of absorption the principle
of free, self-governing dominions.
Courtesy A. S. Barnes & Co. from “A History of Art,” by William H. Goodyear
CONJECTURED RESTORATION OF THE FORUM ROMANUM
Looking N. E. to the Capitol. On Left, Temple of Castor and Pollux and the Basilica Julia.
Right, the Curia. At the End, Temple of Vespasian
MAISON CARRÉE: NÎMES

Engaged Columns on Cella Wall (Pseudo-Peripteral) Columns Surmount the Podium. P. 169
ARCH OF CONSTANTINE
Entablature, Broken Round Columns. Note Decorative Use of Lettering. P. 178
PANTHEON, ROME
P. 171
SECTION OF PANTHEON
COLOSSEUM, ROME
P. 174
SECTION OF COLOSSEUM
Showing the System of Vaulting and Piers
BASILICA OF CONSTANTINE
Showing the Barrel-Vaulted Ceilings. P. 178
ROMAN VAULTING GOTHIC VAULTING

From Baths of Diocletian. Note Absence of From Salisbury Cathedral. Note Curve in
Transverse Rib and Doming. P. 166 Ridge Between Groins. P. 272
THEATRE OF ORANGE, FRANCE

Conjectured Restoration. Note Raised Stage, Architectural Scene and Ceiling Roof,
Orchestra Reserved for Magistrates and Notables
PLAN OF THEATRE OF ORANGE

Conjectured Restoration. P. 176
PORTA AUREA
Golden Gate, Palace of Diocletian, Spalato, Dalmatia. P. 180
PONT-DU-GARD; AQUEDUCT NEAR NÎMES

P. 183
PERISTYLE AND COURT OF THE HOUSE OF THE VETTII

With Garden and Sculptured Objects Restored to Their Original Arrangement. P. 181
WALL PAINTINGS IN THE HOUSE OF THE VETTII
CHAPTER IV
ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
The Romans enlarged the scope of architecture in the direction of the art of
the engineer. While Hellenic architecture had been an expression of the
faculties of reasoning and of taste, co-operating in a singular harmony,
Roman architecture was the product of reasoning stimulated by a practical
sense and an extraordinary energy and audacity. In place of excessive
refinement and sense of proportion, it is distinguished by variety, vastness
of scale and exuberance of decorative detail. While every part of a Greek
temple was constructional, having its distinct function in contributing to the
stability as well as adornment of the whole structure, the Romans, as we
have noted, had a uniform system of building in which they applied the
structural details of the Greeks, very largely in the way of added
embellishment.
Their aptitude for borrowing and adapting is apparent in their orders of
columns and entablatures.
Roman Orders.—In the first place, they borrowed from the Etruscans
the so-called Tuscan order. This had a rudimentary Doric form; the column
being seven diameters in height; the shaft unfluted and tapering toward the
capital, while the entablature was simpler, having no triglyphs, mutules, or
guttæ.
In borrowing from the Hellenes, the Romans made little use of the Doric
order. When it is used, as in the form of engaged columns in the Theatre of
Marcellus, the height of the columns was increased in proportion to their
diameters; the shafts were either smooth or channelled with semicircular,
instead of the subtler, elliptic flutings, separated by narrow fillets; a base
was added and modifications were made in the details of the capital. The
architrave did not overhang the face of the column and was reduced in
height; the triglyphs were used in the frieze only over the centre of the
columns, even at the angles, while the cornice was lighter, with dentils
sometimes taking the place of mutules. The Doric, in fact, did not appeal to
the Roman taste for rich decoration, and, in so far as it was used, was
degraded in style.
The same is true of the Roman adaptation of the Ionic order. Simpler and
more commonplace curves replace the extreme refinement of the volutes
and the fillet of the latter was carried invariably across the top of the
echinus or cushion, while the ornamentation of the entablature was more
profuse. The best use of this order is found in the upper story of the
Theatre of Marcellus; the worst, on the eight remaining columns of the
Temple of Saturn in the Forum Romanum.
The Corinthian order, of which no type sufficiently definite to constitute
an order had been evolved by the Greeks, was fully worked out by the
Romans, with the assistance of Greek artists, and became the favourite
expression of their taste for richness. The shaft was either smooth, as in the
early example of the Pantheon (B.C. 27), or fluted as in the great temple of
Castor and Pollux; the heights in these two cases being respectively 9¾ and
10 diameters. A special base was designed, consisting of tori, scotia, and
fillets, resting on a square plinth.
The inverted bell of the capital was surrounded by an upper and lower
row of acanthus leaves, which differ from the Hellenic forms in being
blunter at the tips. Above the rows of leaves projected the stalks, or
“caulicolæ,” which terminated in spirals, both in the centre of each face and
at the angles of the abacus. The four sides of the latter are concave and
decorated in the centre with a rosette. In the more sumptuous examples
further enrichment of ornament was added to the capital, while the capitals
of the Temple of Castor and Pollux present a unique instance of the
central spirals being interlaced.
The Corinthian architrave in Hellenic usage consisted, it will be
remembered, of three bands, as in the Ionic order. The Romans frequently
embellished the middle one with a version of the anthemion motive. They
also added enrichments to the bed mould beneath the frieze. The latter was
frequently carved with acanthus scrolls, grotesque figures, and ox-skulls,
and garlands. The cornice was also enriched with carved ornament, of
which the most characteristic were modillions or brackets, which appear to
support the cornice.
The Composite order was an invention of the Romans and possibly
suggested by the capitals of the Erechtheion in Athens, where the Ionic
spirals appear above a necking carved with anthemion ornament. The
capital of the Composite order consisted in the upper part of Ionic spirals,
often richly decorated with foliage, and in the lower of two rows of
acanthus leaves, as in the Corinthian order, which was followed also in the
other details of the column and entablature.
The mouldings in Hellenic architecture are distinguished by the
refinement of the contours, in Roman by the richness of carved ornament.
The anta, which appears in Greek temples at the corners of the cella
walls was developed by the Romans into the pilaster. This was a square
pier, projecting about one-sixth of its width from the wall; used either to
divide up and decorate the wall surfaces, or to serve as a “respond” to a
column. It was frequently fluted and corresponded with the column in its
details.
Arch-Vaulting.—The Romans did not invent the arch, but generalised
its use and elaborated it into vaulting, thus introducing into architecture an
element of construction capable of endless application and lending itself not
only to utility but also to variety and magnificence. In doing so they were
assisted by their discovery of the use of concrete. By means of supports and
sheathings of rough timber, temporarily erected, they were able to cast their
arches or vaultings in any form and practically of any size. The concrete
“set” quickly and the arch or vaulting thus became a solid mass, which
exerted but little thrust and covered the space with the rigidity of a lid or
cup.
Such method of construction lessened the tendency of the arch or
vaulting to exert a lateral strain or thrust which occurs when the arch is
composed of voussoirs or, similarly, separate blocks of stone or brick are

Access the PDF of Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN 1133949649 9781133949640 immediately with all chapters

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Access the PDF of Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN 1133949649 9781133949640 immediately with all chapters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Access the PDF of Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th Edition Kotz Treichel Townsend and Treichel ISBN 1133949649 9781133949640 immediately with all chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download Reliable Study Materials and full Test Banks at testbankpack.

Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical

Test Bank for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th

Solution Manual for Chemical Investigations for Chemistry

Solution Manual for Chemistry in Context Applying

Solution Manual for Calculus of a Single Variable Hybrid

Test Bank for Hands On Networking Fundamentals 2nd Edition

Test Bank for Fundamentals of Corporate Finance 10th

Test bank for Humanistic Tradition 7th Edition Fiero

Test Bank for Elementary and Intermediate Algebra Concepts

Solution Manual for Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity 9th

Some points on which students have some problems or questions are:

SOLUTIONS TO STUDY QUESTIONS

2.7 electrons protons neutrons

2.14 15.995 u · 1.661 × 10−24 g/u = 2.657 x 10-23 g

107 Ag 107 – 47 = 60 neutrons

109 Ag 109 – 47 = 62 neutrons

2.25 titanium thallium

2.26 silicon tin antimony sulfur selenium

2.31 Metals: Na, Ni, Np

2.33 Molecular formula for nitric acid: HNO3

The molecule is planar.

2.34 Molecular formula for asparagine: C4H8N2O3

2.41 Ba2+, Br– BaBr2

2.42 Co3+, F– CoF3

2.45 Co2+: CoO Co3+ Co2O3

2.48 (a) incorrect, CaO (c) incorrect, Fe2O3 or FeO

2.49 (a) potassium sulfide (c) ammonium phosphate

2.50 (a) calcium acetate (c) aluminum hydroxide

2.51 (a) (NH4)2CO3 (d) AlPO4

2.52 (a) Ca(HCO3)2 (d) K2HPO4

2.53 Na2CO3 sodium carbonate NaI sodium iodide

2.54 Mg3(PO4)2 magnesium phosphate Mg(NO3)2 magnesium nitrate

2.57 (a) nitrogen trifluoride (c) boron triiodide

2.58 (a) dinitrogen pentaoxide (c) oxygen difluoride

2.59 (a) SCl2 (b) N2O5 (c) SiCl4 (d) B2O3

2.60 (a) BrF3 (d) P2F4

(d) 6.75 g Al · 26.98 g Al = 0.250 mol Al

(d) 0.983 g Xe · 131.3 g Xe = 7.4910–3 mol Xe

1.0 g Fe · 1 mol Fe · 6.021023 Fe atoms = 1.1 1022 Fe atoms

9.5 g Al · 27.0 g Al · 1 mol Al = 2.1 1023 Al atoms

Arsenic has the largest number of atoms in the mixture.

2.69 (a) Fe2O3 159.69 g/mol

2.70 (a) Fe(C6H11O7)2 446.14 g/mol

2.71 (a) Ni(NO3)2·6H2O 290.79 g/mol

2.72 (a) H2C2O4·2H2O 126.07 g/mol

180.2 g C11 H16 O2

(d) 0.0255 mol (CH3)2CO · 58.08 g (CH 3 )2CO = 1.48 (CH3)2CO

2.751.00 kg SO3 · 103 g · 1 mol SO3 = 12.5 mol SO3

2 mol NH + 6.022 1023 NH ions

1 mol (NH 4 ) 2 SO4 1 mol NH4

2 mol N 6.022 1023 N atoms

8 mol H 6.022 1023 H atoms

1 mol S 6.022 1023 S atoms

4 mol O 6.022 1023 O atoms

2.77 Formula: C8H9N1O2

Molar mass: 151.16 g/mol

1 dose = 2 · 500 mg = 1 × 103 mg