When the liquid phase and vapour phase of a binary system obeys Raoult's and Dalton's law respectively, the relative volatility is the ratio of ?->(Show Answer!)

1. When the liquid phase and vapour phase of a binary system obeys Raoult's and Dalton's law respectively, the relative volatility is the ratio of

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->A school has only three classes comprised of 40, 50 and 60 students respectively. In these classes, 10%, 20% and 10% students respectively passed in the examinations. What is the percentage of students passed in the examination from the entire school?....

QA->Change from vapour to liquid is called?....

QA->A gas which obeys the gas laws exactly is called _____ :....

QA->Highest useful compression ratio is the compression ratio at which the engine....

QA->The ratio of the age of two sisters is 3:The product of their ages is The ratio of their ages after 5 years will be:....

MCQ->When the liquid phase and vapour phase of a binary system obeys Raoult's and Dalton's law respectively, the relative volatility is the ratio of....

MCQ->According to Raoult's law, "The vapor pressure exerted by component in a solution is proportional to the mole fraction of that component." Raoult's law is not applicable under the following assumption/condition.....

MCQ->At 60° C, vapour pressure of methanol and water are 84.562 kPa and 19.953 kPa respectively. An aqueous solution of methanol at 60° C exerts a pressure of 39.223 kPa; the liquid phase and vapour phase mole fractions of methanol are 0.1686 and 0.5714 respectively. Activity co-efficient of methanol is....

MCQ->A mixture contains liquid A and liquid B in the ratio of 5 : 4. If 2 litres of liquid B is added to it, then the ratio of liquid A and liquid B becomes 7 : 6. What is the quantity (in litres) of liquid A in the mixture?....

MCQ-> Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow: Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected. The principal of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific “truth.” But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations – to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess. We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the “wrong” ones, and then we find the “right” ones. Now, how can an experiment be “wrong”? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a “law” was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That “law” is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found is to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light. A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the wrong we are. Finally, and most interesting, philosophically we are completely wrong with the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws. Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.Which of the following options is DEFINITLY NOT an approximation to the complete truth?
....