What would happen if N2 were added to N2(g) + O2(g) = 2NO(9) at equilibrium?

O A. Keq would decrease

O B. More No would form.

O C. More O2 and No would form.

O D. More N2 and Oz would form.

The study of chemicals is called chemistry.

The correct answer is B.

According to the principle, the reaction goes from the higher side to the lower side.

According to the question, N2 is added to the reaction which will lead to an increase in the amount of N2 in the reactant.

More amount in reactant will lead to the formation of more product and the in the equation more NO will form.

Hence, the correct answer is B that is More No would form.

For more information, refer to the link:-

link

Balanced chemical equation is :

It is given that the equation is in equilibrium.

We need to find what will happen if we add more is added .

By Le Chatelier's principle :

Changing the concentration of a chemical will shift the equilibrium to the side that would counter that change in concentration.

It means production of the side where content is added will decrease and concentration on other side will increase .

So , more NO would form .

Therefore, option B. is correct.

Hence, this is the required solution.

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.