We go under the code names seen but we are all actually Gabriel Moussa even you.Soooo Drsoccerball is actually Ekman who is actually Gabriel Moussa?
my trials finished 3 weeks ago and i still haven't started studyingGuys I don't feel like studying until I get my trial marks back ... any advice to like push past those barriers that are clouding mi brain
* Just do it*Guys I don't feel like studying until I get my trial marks back ... any advice to like push past those barriers that are clouding mi brain
''Pride comes before the fall" ~ Powderfinger, Up and Down and Back Againlol omg. Remember how I was saying I'm pretty sure I'm staying first for a certain subject? Well I came second in my biology exam, darnit. Hope I'm not second overall now
Guys I don't feel like studying until I get my trial marks back ... any advice to like push past those barriers that are clouding mi brain
Fk my school is too richAnyone else had a look at Sydney Uni's E12 scheme?
I just realised that Integrand is becoming 'integrated' into the 2015er's chit chat thread
Depends on how your teacher marks? but pretty sure trials were a lot harder at my school (especially english) so perhaps.Haha. I'm praying that I'm still first overall so badly. I just wanted 2 firsts at least, that's all.
But it was a pretty hard test. So I'm pretty happy with 91.5%. Do trials somewhat reflect what you'll do in the HSC (the ones you do well in ofc)?
You have to say the first one, so it gets repetitive when they want you to interpret an equilibrium graph.Chem students!
When we mention Le Chatelier's principle must we say how when a closed system is disrupted, the reaction that is favoured is the one that counteracts the change?
Instead can we say: according to Le Chatelier's principle, an increase temperature will result in the system favouring the reaction that decreases the pressure by shifting to the side with less gaseous molecules..?
you have to mention its in equlibrium which also implies that it is closed.Chem students!
When we mention Le Chatelier's principle must we say how when a closed system is disrupted, the reaction that is favoured is the one that counteracts the change?
Instead can we say: according to Le Chatelier's principle, an increase temperature will result in the system favouring the reaction that decreases the pressure by shifting to the side with less gaseous molecules..?
How would i word it in the shortest phrase possible?You have to say the first one, so it gets repetitive when they want you to interpret an equilibrium graph.
So, according to Le Chatelier's principle a system at equilibrium when disrupted will favour the reaction that counteracts the change...?you have to mention its in equlibrium which also implies that it is closed.
You cant word it shorter, you have to write it out.How would i word it in the shortest phrase possible?
So, according to Le Chatelier's principle a system at equilibrium when disrupted will favour the reaction that counteracts the change...?
You cant word it shorter, you have to write it out.
^Good definition or nah?according to Le Chatelier's principle a system at equilibrium when disrupted will favour the reaction that counteracts the change
Well the way I define is: "According to Le Chatlier's Principle, a chemical system in equilibrium will shift in order to minimise a disturbance of *Insert whatever disturbance had occurred in the question*."^Good definition or nah?