What are the disadvantages and advantages of using the ball and stick models to construct molecules?
959515
advantages:\nYou can get a general idea of the shape of the molecule\nit gives a 3d representation of the molecule\n\ndisadvantages:\nif the molecule has double/triple bonds it doesnot give an accurate representation of sigma and pi bonds
253918
Molecules are made of atoms
882835
Probably carbon latice structures, like buckeyballs or nanotubes.  These could then contain the smaller compounds that are doing the desired work.
808364
The advantages to petroleum based are that they are stronger, less brittle, cheaper to make, and easily recyclable. Some disadvantages are that they produce More waste than synthetic plastics, are non-biodegradable, and use a very large portion of the crude oil supply to produce. I hope this was very helpful for you.
381672
if you are trying to build a model - i would recommend either a playdo type creation or if you wanted to be fancy - use a jello mold.\n\nJello mold you make the mini components first and let them harden.  then put them in place in and outside of your 'membrane' and fill in with a clear jello (knox).  The clear represents your axon and cell membrane with your multicolored preformed pieces acting as your pump, na, and K+\n\nhave fun!
490979
less elements, so less complicated maths.  \n\nYou get a less accurate result, which I don't consider an advantage.
335880
i'm sorry. i'm taking O-chem but we didn't talk about cartesian vectors in our class. it's mostly nomenclature and synthesis.
336395
I'm not pretty sure about this but because of the low molecular weight, the attraction between molecules is little and therefore outside forces can easily scatter these molecules troughout space. This results in gas state rather than liquid or solid
813557
You can get the basics out of any encyclopedia , I did way back in high school , 1965 . Built a model for Chemestry class , got an A+ .\nThe 2 problems are getting and refining the fizzable materials .\nThe rest is just another bomb .
338652
I believe that this is a lot to do with modelling biological/chemical processes on computer, and using this to answer biotech questions, rather than in the lab.\nSo for example, you may model various molecules, and then look for ways that these molecular structures fit with other viral molecular sturctures, to try and produce a vaccine that would block the virus's ability to transmit itself. It involves an ability in biochemistry, and powerful computer networks to analyse all possible matches.
923134
Use the pastel or whatever the kindergarden kids use.  It is like mud but comes in different colours.  The model should be a representation of the cross-section of your cell.  Use strings and other things to show different structures of the cell.  Some diagrams are drawn in 3D, and that's what your model should look like.  I wish they made us do that in university.  It would be fun.
69592
I was recently looking at one that contains many applets that help to visualize the structure of many compounds and atomic latices. (See 1st link, below)\n\nBut that may not be what you're looking for. If you could narrow your question down to a certain part of chemistry or a certain reaction, etc... that would help.\n\nIf not, then the second link is a cool site that has many interesting easy-to-understand concepts accompanied by some fun applets. (See 2nd link, below)
112298
Ideal gas laws assume that all particles are spherically symmtric and engage only in elastic collisions.  They ignore all other types of molecular energy (rotation in other planes of symmetry or asymmetry, bond stretching/compressing/bending, rotation about a molecular bond--all these things can and do absord energy from a collision), and they negate the effects of all intermolecular forces, like dipole interations, hydrogen bonding, London dispersion forces, etc.\n\nIn gases like helium, the atoms are basically spherically symmetric, and most of these random forces are neglible.  Hence, ideal gas laws work really well for these--only at really ridiculously low temperatures and high pressures do these forces manage to liquify helium.  The larger you molecule is--and I'm not talking about mass so much as the number of chemical bonds--the less ideally it behaves.  The greater the heterogeneity of a gass, the less ideally it behaves.  The greater the polarity (eg seperation of charges) displayed by the molecule, the less ideally it behaves.
622277
Manufactured products are made from atoms. The properties of those products depend on how those atoms are arranged. If we rearrange the atoms in coal we can make diamond. If we rearrange the atoms in sand (and add a few other trace elements) we can make computer chips. If we rearrange the atoms in dirt, water and air we can make potatoes. \nTodays manufacturing methods are very crude at the molecular level. Casting, grinding, milling and even lithography move atoms in great thundering statistical herds. It's like trying to make things out of LEGO blocks with boxing gloves on your hands. Yes, you can push the LEGO blocks into great heaps and pile them up, but you can't really snap them together the way you'd like. \n\nIn the future, nanotechnology will let us take off the boxing gloves. We'll be able to snap together the fundamental building blocks of nature easily, inexpensively and in most of the ways permitted by the laws of physics. This will be essential if we are to continue the revolution in computer hardware beyond about the next decade, and will also let us fabricate an entire new generation of products that are cleaner, stronger, lighter, and more precise. \n\nIt's worth pointing out that the word "nanotechnology" has become very popular and is used to describe many types of research where the characteristic dimensions are less than about 1,000 nanometers. For example, continued improvements in lithography have resulted in line widths that are less than one micron: this work is often called "nanotechnology." Sub-micron lithography is clearly very valuable (ask anyone who uses a computer!) but it is equally clear that conventional lithography will not let us build semiconductor devices in which individual dopant atoms are located at specific lattice sites. Many of the exponentially improving trends in computer hardware capability have remained steady for the last 50 years. There is fairly widespread belief that these trends are likely to continue for at least another several years, but then conventional lithography starts to reach its limits. \n\nIf we are to continue these trends we will have to develop a new manufacturing technology which will let us inexpensively build computer systems with mole quantities of logic elements that are molecular in both size and precision and are interconnected in complex and highly idiosyncratic patterns. Nanotechnology will let us do this. \n\nWhen it's unclear from the context whether we're using the specific definition of "nanotechnology" (given here) or the broader and more inclusive definition (often used in the literature), we'll use the terms "molecular nanotechnology" or "molecular manufacturing." \n\nWhatever we call it, it should let us \n\nGet essentially every atom in the right place. \nMake almost any structure consistent with the laws of physics that we can specify in molecular detail. \nHave manufacturing costs not greatly exceeding the cost of the required raw materials and energy. \n\nThere are two more concepts commonly associated with nanotechnology: \nPositional assembly. \nMassive parallelism. \n\nClearly, we would be happy with any method that simultaneously achieved the first three objectives. However, this seems difficult without using some form of positional assembly (to get the right molecular parts in the right places) and some form of massive parallelism (to keep the costs down). \nThe need for positional assembly implies an interest in molecular robotics, e.g., robotic devices that are molecular both in their size and precision. These molecular scale positional devices are likely to resemble very small versions of their everyday macroscopic counterparts. Positional assembly is frequently used in normal macroscopic manufacturing today, and provides tremendous advantages. Imagine trying to build a bicycle with both hands tied behind your back! The idea of manipulating and posit
37368
You'll need to read (or cut and paste) some of the facts behind those carbon compounds.\n\nXav covered the pure carbon compounds.\n\nMethol seems to be the odd man out, a simple alcohol better known as methanol - CH3OH. \n\nC60Br24 is brominated buckminster fullerene rather than the pure carbon molecule. It will have brom atoms sticking out from the soccer ball shape.\n\nMolecule or crystal models usually come as stick (or stick and ball) models, or as calotte model with spherical balls intersecting. The stick model emphasizes the chemical bonds you know from structural formula of organic molecules and the location of the atom core, whereas the calotte model signifies the extend of the electron cloud surrounding the atom core.
46275
the goal is to make the total amount of atoms on each side equal\n\nso you add coeficients to the front of molecules (which is multiplied by the little numbers on bottom) and see if you can get the same number on both sides. its kind of hard sometiems if you dont see it.
806618
The only difference I can see would be the molecular geometry, due to the number of H's bonded onto the anion. Also, when drawing the Lewis dot structures, NH3 (N) would have one lone pair of electrons, HF (F) and H2O (O) would have two. This would dictate their structures according to the VSEPR rules.