Chemistry

JSK 252

Just wondering how people are getting on with the course. Most difficult topic? Easiest topic? How much of the course have ye covered so far?

My class has covered the following chapters from Chemistry Live:

Chapter 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 ( half done ), 14, 15, 16, 21

ayumi

are class are doing understanding chemistry and done chaps 1,2,3 and we have tiped on chap 17

and they are pretty long

Basically,everything they tell you about chem at LC is a lie.

Fad

Deleted User wrote: »

Basically,everything they tell you about chem at LC is a lie.

Our teacher went through this with us, its not a lie, its just HIGHLY simplified!


Everything @ JC level however is in fact a lie


We've done all of the atom bonding etc up to anions, then mole concept, stoicheometry, Acid&Base Volumetric analysis, Organic Chem (all of it), and we just more onto Redox Reactions.

Fad

Fad wrote: »

Our teacher went through this with us, its not a lie, its just HIGHLY simplified!

No he's actually pretty much right. Most of the stuff on the course that isn't got to do with organic chemistry is pretty much a lie, well it's over simplified to the point of being a lie. What they tell you is on par to believing the sun orbits the earth. The majority of what is on the course on the atom is almost 100 years out of date.

Fad

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

No he's actually pretty much right. Most of the stuff on the course that isn't got to do with organic chemistry is pretty much a lie, well it's over simplified to the point of being a lie. What they tell you is on par to believing the sun orbits the earth. The majority of what is on the course on the atom is almost 100 years out of date.

Oh I dont doubt that its simplified insanely, but what would be the point on have a huge section involving Quarks and Positrons etc (That being what im doing in Physics now)and bogging us down with it?. Lucky for me, Organic Chemistry is the only section Id be looking into studying .

Davidius

Chemistry Live:
1 (:pac:), 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19-ish and 21.

Fad

Davidius wrote: »

Chemistry Live:
1 (:pac:),

A detailed analysis of that chapter is key to the development of a future chemist.

challengemaster

Up as far as about 25 or 26 now in Chemistry live.

Had the worse teacher ever last year though, so we've pretty much got to learn everything again. 2 years course into a few months \o/

Piste

We've done chapters 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,12,13,14,15,16 and we've just started chapter 21.

cautioner

We haven't done any of the theoretical stuff at the start, which makes trying to understand all the rest of it a bit of a bitch when it's presumed we know wtf a sigma bond is.

6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,21,22,24.

Not bad going, now that I look at it.

Fad

cautioner wrote: »

We haven't done any of the theoretical stuff at the start, which makes trying to understand all the rest of it a bit of a bitch when it's presumed we know wtf a sigma bond is.

I have done that chapter but i still dont really know what it is

(Head-on overlap?)

Piste

That's odd that your teacher didn't do the theory with you, it makes everything much easier to understand, also some of the questions based on later chapters require you to know things about molecule sizes/bonds etc.

cautioner

Yeah, we're constantly skipping parts of chapters that require the theoretical stuff. I presume we're going to go back and raid all those extra bits after doing those first chapters, maybe it'll serve as sort of revision at the same time?
Feicfear.

Fad

Piste wrote: »

That's odd that your teacher didn't do the theory with you, it makes everything much easier to understand, also some of the questions based on later chapters require you to know things about molecule sizes/bonds etc.

While these chapters are essential for general understanding, they are easily the most tedious part of the chemistry course, and in the space of the month or so we where doing them, i think 4 or 5 people dropped, thinking this is the most boring and difficult subject ever.

My teacher has tried to skip and go back to them in years gone by, but id say its even harder to go to such a boring and experiment free section.

cautioner

Personally the experiments bore the hell out of me anyway. It seems like there's a million and one tedious titrations/redoxes/refluxes. Such a disappointment. The only one I remember enjoying was when we combusted ethene or ehtyne or some sh!t (tells you how well I know my experiments ).

cautioner

cautioner wrote: »

Personally the experiments bore the hell out of me anyway. It seems like there's a million and one tedious titrations/redoxes/refluxes. Such a disappointment. The only one I remember enjoying was when we combusted ethene or ehtyne or some sh!t (tells you how well I know my experiments ).

You're exactly right, experiments are the most boring part of the course!

But anyway, we've pretty much everything but the two stiochometry (however you spell it) chapters and the option done.

cautioner

I love stochiometry. It's like foundation level Maths or something. Anyone have any thoughts/opinions on the options actually? I don't know which one we're doing but from my quick skimming it seems that one is industrial and the other's environmental. Is that right?

Fad

cautioner wrote: »

The only one I remember enjoying was when we combusted ethene or ehtyne or some sh!t (tells you how well I know my experiments ).

You probably did both:Ethene burns with a luminous flame*
Ethyne burns with a sooty flame*


*(i think!, if im wrong i will bear no responsibility if you happen to fail the leaving cert due to this )

cautioner

Sooty. It was everywhere. Fun times in room 12. :rolleyes:

~Candy~

but...but...but...but...

aren't you in uni ....already MR......

Fad

cautioner wrote: »

Sooty. It was everywhere. Fun times in room 12. :rolleyes:

It was all in the fume hood for us

face1990

Ah good old Ethyne! We did that one in the fume cupboard, but neglected to close it fully. It was like Auschwitz, we were gassing ourselves out of it.

JSK 252

Piste wrote: »

That's odd that your teacher didn't do the theory with you, it makes everything much easier to understand, also some of the questions based on later chapters require you to know things about molecule sizes/bonds etc.

In actual fact, Question 5 is based on atomic theory and in my opinion it would be completely stupid, not to do that question in the exam. Lots of people dont do it for some reason. Its long fair enough, but its an easy 50 marks if you knwo the right terminology for bohrs theory etc. etc. plus if you can hack that then your well on your way to an A1.

My favourite part of the course is the acid/ base titrations especially the water of crystallisation of sodium carbonate! I have such an easy way of calculating it! Doubt it will appear for us though. It came up in 2006 but who knows!

Bleach is highly likely if I was betting with paddypower. The calculation is easy, with the dilution factor.

JSK 252

Fad wrote: »

You probably did both:Ethene burns with a luminous flame*
Ethyne burns with a sooty flame*


*(i think!, if im wrong i will bear no responsibility if you happen to fail the leaving cert due to this )

No your correct fad.

Just for clarification. Ethene burns with a luminious flame. Ethyne burns with a luminious smoky flame and a great deal of soot is formed.

Piste

JSK 252 wrote: »

Bleach is highly likely if I was betting with paddypower. The calculation is easy, with the dilution factor.

My teacher is thinking the iron tablet experiment will come up, seeing as it hasn't since 2003.

JSK 252

Piste wrote: »

My teacher is thinking the iron tablet experiment will come up, seeing as it hasn't since 2003.

Thats quite true too, but Im still thinking of bleach because it has never been asked yet and this is the 8th year of the syllabus.

Piste, what do you think of the iron tablet experiment anyway? I remember doing it at the start of the year and found the calculations a little tricky at the start but I did a test on it last week and got 100% so Im grand with it now!

Piste

I think it's ok, it can be a little tricky because of fiddly bits like dividing by the no. of tablets used, and whether the iron is in FeSO4 form or not, you really have to read all the information very carefully to make sure you don't mess up a part of the calculation. That's interesting about the bleach, I hadn't realised that experiment was never asked. I really hope the benzoic acid experiment doesn't come up, it's so....finicky.

JSK 252

Piste wrote: »

I think it's ok, it can be a little tricky because of fiddly bits like dividing by the no. of tablets used, and whether the iron is in FeSO4 form or not, you really have to read all the information very carefully to make sure you don't mess up a part of the calculation. That's interesting about the bleach, I hadn't realised that experiment was never asked. I really hope the benzoic acid experiment doesn't come up, it's so....finicky.

I find that experiment the exact same. That makes 2 of us!
Yah it can be slightly tedious alright but you have to remember that there is only so much they could ask about it. i.e when were insoluble impurities removed, when were soluble impurities removed, why was a minimum amount of solute( benzoic acid ) used when dissolving in water etc etc. The 2004 question is really a good stepping stone for knowing that experiment and is well worth working off if they were to ask it again. I wouldnt get bogged down by it.

cautioner

You people are scaring the crap out of me.

Iron whatlets? Benzawhoosie?

Man.How I would kill to be doing actual chemistry instead of FT-IR and Chemometrics!:(

The only part of chem that is relatively the same in Uni is Radioactivity.