If each jar below contains exactly one mole of each element, which jar contains the greatest mass? (The atomic mass of each element is given.)

MolesAQ2
A. The jar of carbon.
B. The jar of sulfur.
C. The jar of aluminum.
D. Each jar contains the same mass.

The atomic mass of Sulfur has been the highest. Thus, the mass of 1 mole of Sulfur is high as compared to others. So, option B is correct.

The atomic mass has been equal to the mass of an element in 1 mole.

From the given atomic mass, the masses are:

Carbon: 12 g/mole

Sulfur: 32 g/mole

Aluminum: 27 g/mole

From carbon, sulfur, and aluminum, the highest atomic mass is of sulfur. The increasing order of atomic mass will be :

Carbon < Aluminum < Sulfur.

For more information about mole of element, refer to the link:

link

B.

The jar of sulfur.

Explanation:

The molar mass of sulfur is 32 g/mol

The molar mass of Aluminium is 27g/mol

The molar mass of carbon is 12 g/mol

Therefore based on these numbers, it is evident that a mole of Sulfur weighs the heaviest.

Different elements weight different because their atoms have different mass numbers. The lower you go in the periodic table the heavier the atoms became because they have more atomic units (neutrons and protons) in their nuclei.

quartz

explanation:

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.