Why does sugar dissovole in cold water WITH Kool-Aid mix, but needs hot water to dissovle when sugar has to dissovole with a tea mix?
210895
Sugar will dissolve in cold beverages regardless of what else is going on.  However, in both Kool-Aid and tea, it is a fact that the sugar dissolves more easily in warmer water, and you can get more sugar to dissolve in warmer water than you can in cold water.  It wouldn't be true to say that sugar can't dissolve in cold water in a tea mix.  Kool-Aid or tea mix, it doesn't matter because neither will have a real influence on the solublily of sugar.\n\nYour observation, then, is probably just wrong.
295016
Also, it doesn't mix with water, so it doesn't dissolve. Alcohol is lighter than water too, but it doesn't float, it dissolves.
383520
The general rule is "Like dissolves like."  That means polar or ionic things in polar solvents (like water) and non-polar things (like paraffin) in non-polar solvents (like mineral spirits).\n\nIonic conducts, non-ionic dies not.\n\nParaffin above looks okay.\nDichlorobenzene is not ionic.  I do not think it conducts.\nHydroquinone should be soluble in hot and cold mineral spirits.\nSugar is non-ionic.  It should not conduct.  Have you never put sugar into ice tea?\nSodium nitrate looks good.\nPotassium chloride is similar to table salt (Sodium chloride).  It should dissolve in cold as well as hot water.
372923
Vapor Pressure of Solutions\n\nA. \n\nAmount of the sugar present = 10.0g/ (342) = 0.0292397661 mol\nAmount of water present = 200g/ (18) = 11.11111111 mol\nThus, X(H2O), which signifies the fraction of water present,\n= 11.11111111/ (11.11111111 + 0.0292397661)\n= 0.9973753281\nAt 25 deg Celsius,\nVapor Pressure of Water is then = 0.9973753281 x 23.8\n                                                      = 23.73753281 Torr.\n\n\nB.\n\nAmount of Calcium Chloride = 49.4g/ (40.1) = 1.2319202 mol\nAmount of water = 150g/ (18) = 8.333333333 mol\nThus, X(H2O), which signifies the fraction of water present,\n= 8.333333333/ (8.333333333 + 1.2319202 )\n= 0.8712088294\nVapor Pressure of Water is then = 0.8712088294 x 23.8\n                                                      = 20.73477014 Torr.\n\n\nFREEZING POINT DEPRESSION/BOILING POINT ELEVATION OF SOLUTIONS\n\nA - NOTE: T(f) signifies T with the small f at its bottom right. Similarly, b(f) is an 'f' with a small f at its bottom right.\n\ndT(f) = change in freezing point\n\nChange in dT(f) = 5.48 - 3.77 = 1.71\nTherefore, from {c}\nb(f), which signifies the molality,\n= 1.71/ 5.12 = 0.333984375\n\nSince molality = (Amount of solute added)/ (mass of solvent/ kg),\n\nAmount of solute added = [500 x 10^(-3)]x(0.333984375)\n                                        = 0.1669921875mol\n\nThus, Mr of the unknown compound is 20.0/ (0.1669921875)\n= 119.7660819\n\nB\n\nChange in T(b) = (0.51) x {54.6/ [0.997x400x10^(-3)]}\n                         = 69.82447342\nsince  dT(f) = K x b(f) and\nmolality = (Amount of solute added)/ (mass of solvent/ kg).\n\nI am afraid I do not know how to proceed from here for I am not sure of the method to find the normal boiling point of a solution.
197124
Yes definitely! This is for the simple reason:-Tap water is likely to contain dissolved salts, and other impurities. But distilled water contains only water, and hence better.
123232
First of all, you're a nut.  Or at least a guy who likes to buy new microwaves.\n\nI'm not sure there is an actual reaction between sodium hydroxide and sugar.  For the sake of chemistry, we can treat all sugar as C6H12O6.  If anything the reaction will produce carbon dioxide and water, but this happens anyway when you burn any sugar so it might be hard to separate the two processes. \n\nWill check and get back to you  :)\n\nUpdate:  See the link below.  The only thing I can find is that NaOH will oxidize glucose, though this doesn't work as well for sucrose.  I don't think heating will have any effect other than to make the reaction go faster (and it already goes pretty fast, apparently.\n\nHave you thought about a career in chemistry?  You have the right kind of mind for it -- i.e., let's throw these chemicals together and see what happens!  By the way, I would NOT try this with NaOH and any kind of acid solution.  It might be dangerous under the wrong conditions.
25502
Sugars are chains of carbon with -OH (alcohol) groups hanging off each carbon.  When two sugars join, the -OH groups of two sugars merge.  One sugar loses the -H off the -OH, and the other loses the -OH, which joins the -H (or an equivalent H) to become HOH, aka water.  The sugars as then joined by carbons being linked to the same O, also called an ether bond.
315350
A 30% Acetic Acid solution has a density of 1.05 g/mL.  Water has a density of 1.0 g/mL.  So it is reasonable to assume that Acetic acid ("vinegar") is more dense than water, but the two are very, very close indeed.\n\nWhen you dissolve Acetic acid in water, the two mix to form a solution.  It is not easy to distill away the acetic acid from the water.\n\nJust because something is more/less dense than water does not necesarily mean it has a lower/higher boiling point.
264156
Diffusion of a Dye in Hot and Cold Water\n\nPurpose:  The purpose of this experiment is to demonstrate the principle of diffusion.  Diffusion is the net movement of particles (atoms, ions, or molecules) from an area of greater concentration to areas of lesser concentration.\n\nMaterials and Methods:  For this experiment, the student will require a projector, two petri dishes, two 150 ml beakers, hot plate, potassium permanganate (purple dye), and a spatula.  Obtain about 50 ml of cold water in one beaker and about 50 ml or boiling water in the other.  Place the petri dishes on the projector and add cold water to one dish and boiling water to the other.  Allow the water in the dishes to become still.  Using the spatula, add a crystal of potassium permanganate to the center of each dish\n\nExperiment:  Observe the experiment for several minutes and note what happens to the purple dye in each petri dish.\n\nConclusion:  Do you observe diffusion in each?\n\nHow does the rate of diffusion differ? \n\nWhy is there a greater rate of diffusion in one
560354
You need to extract the sugar from the solution.\n\nExtract it by using a solvent where sugar dissolves but the salt won't.  If the sugar dissolves more in your other solvent, the extraction will be faster.  You might try isopropyl alcohol (2-propanol or IPA) as the solvent.\n\nStep by step:\n\nGet an separation funnel of the right size.\n\nPour in your solution.\n\nPour in the IPA.  Confirm which layer is the aqueous (bottom) and which is the organic layer.)\n\nMix the two layers by gently shaking and swirling.\n\nSeparate the two layers, by decanting the top layer (fastest).\n\nRepeat w/ fresh IPA.\n\nIf you want the sugar, then boil off or rotovaporate your IPA.\n\nYou'll have to check or determine the solubility of sugar in IPA (can't find it in my CRC Handbook, but I don't have alot of time).
512675
because hot water has more energy than cold, giving the molecules more energy to move(melt)faster\n\n (i am trying to get to level 2 best answerer would help)
132522
gases are in general more soluble in cold liquids, so less of the dissolved carbon dioxide is lost from an iced glass of Coke vs. one at room temperature.  I've also noticed that drinks with artifical sweeteners tend to go flat faster, but I have not figured out yet whey it seems like the presence of large amounts of sugars affect the solubility of the CO2 yet.
143166
. Yes -- here is a general explanation for all you non-belivers.\n\nHot water can in fact freeze faster than cold water for a wide range of experimental conditions.  This phenomenon is extremely counter- intuitive, and surprising even to most scientists, but it is in fact real.  It has been seen and studied in numerous experiments.  While this phenomenon has been known for centuries, and was described by Aristotle, Bacon, and Descartes [1-3], it was not introduced to the modern scientific community until 1969, by a Tanzanian high school student named Mpemba.  Both the early scientific history of this effect, and the story of Mpemba's rediscovery of it, are interesting in their own right -- Mpemba's story in particular provides a dramatic parable against making snap judgements about what is impossible.  This is described separately below.\n\nThe phenomenon that hot water may freeze faster than cold is often called the Mpemba effect.  Because, no doubt, most readers are extremely skeptical at this point, we should begin by stating precisely what we mean by the Mpemba effect.  We start with two containers of water, which are identical in shape, and which hold identical amounts of water.  The only difference between the two is that the water in one is at a higher (uniform) temperature than the water in the other.  Now we cool both containers, using the exact same cooling process for each container.  Under some conditions the initially warmer water will freeze first.  If this occurs, we have seen the Mpemba effect.  Of course, the initially warmer water will not freeze before the initially cooler water for all initial conditions.  If the hot water starts at 99.9° C, and the cold water at 0.01° C, then clearly under those circumstances, the initially cooler water will freeze first.  However, under some conditions the initially warmer water will freeze first -- if that happens, you have seen the Mpemba effect.  But you will not see the Mpemba effect for just any initial temperatures, container shapes, or cooling conditions.\n\nThis seems impossible, right? Many sharp readers may have already come up with a common proof that the Mpemba effect is impossible.  The proof usually goes something like this.  Say that the initially cooler water starts at 30° C and takes 10 minutes to freeze, while the initially warmer water starts out at 70° C.  Now the initially warmer water has to spend some time cooling to get to get down to 30° C, and after that, it's going to take 10 more minutes to freeze.  So since the initially warmer water has to do everything that the initially cooler water has to do, plus a little more, it will take at least a little longer, right? What can be wrong with this proof?\n\nWhat's wrong with this proof is that it implicitly assumes that the water is characterized solely by a single number -- the average temperature.  But if other factors besides the average temperature are important, then when the initially warmer water has cooled to an average temperature of 30° C, it may look very different than the initially cooler water (at a uniform 30° C) did at the start.  Why? Because the water may have changed when it cooled down from a uniform 70° C to an average 30° C.  It could have less mass, less dissolved gas, or convection currents producing a non-uniform temperature distribution.  Or it could have changed the environment around the container in the refrigerator.  All four of these changes are conceivably important, and each will be considered separately below.  So the impossibility proof given above doesn't work.  And in fact the Mpemba effect has been observed in a number of controlled experiments [5,7-14]\n\nIt is still not known exactly why this happens.  A number of possible explanations for the effect have been proposed, but so far the experiments do not show clearly which, if any, of the proposed mechanisms is the most important one.  While you will often hear confident claims that X
53745
Well for an eight year old....(sounds like an intelligent one to me though)... The reason water freezes slower is because the particles of salt and sugar get in the way of water making a ice crystal.  Salt takes longer because when dissolved it "ionizes" or breaks apart into 2 particles while sugar remains as one.  Salt having two particles it is able to disturb more molecules of water from making ice crystals. I hope that helps! It excites me to here a child of such a young age interested in such things.
486024
There may be certain conditions in which two beakers of water, one at a higher temperature, put into a freezer together, will freeze with the originally hotter one freezing first. It only happens under certain conditions, and is NOT generally true. Apparently the hotter one can develop stronger convection currents in the beaker due to it's initially hotter temp and increased evaporation at the surface, and the continued movement of the water due to the currents set up initially will allow faster heat transfer as it cools.\n\nIt is called the "Mpemba effect".
489332
The solute CaBr2 contains 3 ions, which are all separated when it dissolves in water.\nGlucose, although it is a big molecule, is only one particle. Therefore CaBr2 provides three times the lowering of freezing point that glucose does\nBoth substances are freely soluble because the particles have a good attraction to water. But the solution of CaBr2 will not freeze at -5C because it has 6.00M of ions in it (3 x 2.0M).
482167
Strangely enough, the HOT water would freeze first.  There is a chemical explanation for this.