pka vs ka

Moderators: Chem_Mod, Chem_Admin

Rayna Irving 2C
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:33 pm

pka vs ka

Postby Rayna Irving 2C » Sun Jan 31, 2021 10:52 pm

Why is it that we can add pka + pkb to get pkw but we have to multiply ka and kb to get kw?

John Antowan 1K
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:19 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby John Antowan 1K » Sun Jan 31, 2021 10:54 pm

Since pka usually deals with small decimals, adding the values will not get to the desired value of 1x10^-14. The only way to achieve this with decimals is by multiplying.

Stuti Pradhan 2J
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:32 pm
Been upvoted: 5 times

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Stuti Pradhan 2J » Sun Jan 31, 2021 10:57 pm

I believe it is because of the product property of logarithms which states that
log(MN) = log(M) + log(N). Multiplying Ka and Kb will give you Kw, but if you want to find the pKw, you would be doing log(Kw)=log(Ka*Kb), which equals log(Ka)+log(Kb) or pKa+pKb.

Hope this helps!

Randi Ruelas 1G
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:15 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Randi Ruelas 1G » Sun Jan 31, 2021 10:58 pm

The values for Ka and Kb are small, and when we multiply numbers with exponents we would just add the exponents, to give us an even smaller number. It makes sense to add pka and pkb due to the fact, it is the -log for ka and kb, so it is giving us a much greater number

John_Tran_3J
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:58 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby John_Tran_3J » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:00 pm

Since it p values involves -log, you would be given valets that you have to multiply or divide.

Nina Ellefsen 2D
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:33 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Nina Ellefsen 2D » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:05 pm

Since pKa and pKb are both -log values with the same base, saying pKa+pKb is the same as saying -log(Ka*Kb)

TiffanyBrownfield 2I
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:42 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby TiffanyBrownfield 2I » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:43 pm

When you deal with exponents, you know that when you divide or multiply values with exponents, you simply add or subtract them. (ex. 10^-14 / 10^-7 = 10^-7). The pKa takes the -log base 10 of the Ka value, so it's basically taking on the value of the exponent in a way. This is why you add when you deal with pKa and multiply with kA.

Sarah Salam 1J
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:31 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Sarah Salam 1J » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:51 pm

You add pKa and pKb because they are logarithmic values, and based on their properties adding them is like multiplying Ka and Kb.

Luveia Pangilinan 1A
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:48 pm
Been upvoted: 1 time

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Luveia Pangilinan 1A » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:53 pm

this is because that is a smaller value compared to the other two :D

Arnav Saud 2C
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:51 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Arnav Saud 2C » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:59 pm

If I'm correct, the reason why we can add pka and pkb to get pkw is because pka and pkb are found by taking the logmarithm of the ka and kb. When you multiply two logs together, you can add their inner parts up.
Thus,
-log(ka*kb)) = -log(ka) + -log(kb) ---> This should translate to pka + pkb

MariaCassol1L
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:18 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby MariaCassol1L » Tue Feb 02, 2021 9:16 pm

This is because of log laws.
If we assume that Ka x Kb = Kw is true

we take the -log of both sides:
-log(Ka x Kb) = -log (Kw)

log law: log(ab)=log(a) + log(b):
-log(Ka)+ (-log(Kb))= -log(Kw)

So since pKa=-logKa, pKb=-logKb, pKw=-logKw you can write:
pKa+pKb=pKw

I believe Dr.Lavelle has some math review on the 14B website, but just to add on a similar law applies to division:
log(a/b)= log(a)-log(b)

Bai Rong Lin 2K
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:54 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Bai Rong Lin 2K » Sat Feb 06, 2021 10:56 pm

I remember something about it being a smaller value.

Karl Yost 1L
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:19 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Karl Yost 1L » Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:41 pm

It's because of log properties:

logAB= logA + logB

Britney Tran IJ
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 12:18 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Britney Tran IJ » Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:47 pm

you're adding pKa and pKb because they're log functions

Kathy_Li_1H
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:31 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Kathy_Li_1H » Sun Feb 07, 2021 12:08 pm

Hi! I believe the reasoning behind this is the logarithm function for pka (logab = log a + log b).

Lung Sheng Liang 3J
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:33 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Lung Sheng Liang 3J » Sun Feb 07, 2021 5:39 pm

Hello, it's because pKa and pKb are the log functions of Ka and Kb

Victor Qiu 1C
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:59 pm
Been upvoted: 2 times

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Victor Qiu 1C » Sun Feb 07, 2021 6:25 pm

log10(ab) = log10(a) + log10(b) is correct

Also,
if pKw = pKa + pKb
10-pKw = 10-(pKa+pKb)
10-pKw = 10-(pKa) × 10-(pKb)
Kw = Ka × Kb

Morgan Gee 3B
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:48 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Morgan Gee 3B » Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:33 pm

pKa is the -log[ka]. This changes the relationships because of the way logs work. When you do 10^-14 = ka x kb and take the negative log of that equation, you end up with 14 = pKa + pKb

Astha Sahoo 3I
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:52 pm
Been upvoted: 1 time

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Astha Sahoo 3I » Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:35 pm

We use the rule for logs. Ln(a) + ln(b) = ln(a*b). Thus, we multiply the values for concentrations, but for the pKa and pKb, since they are logs, they use the rule of logs.

David Y
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:49 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby David Y » Sat Mar 06, 2021 5:50 pm

logAB= logA + logB

Jose Miguel Conste 3H
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:15 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Jose Miguel Conste 3H » Mon Mar 08, 2021 12:56 am

its because the log rules, log(pka) + log(pkb) = pka*pkb

Brian Acevedo 2E
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:44 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Brian Acevedo 2E » Tue Mar 09, 2021 8:16 pm

This has to do with the logarithm rule which states that the sum of two logs (let's call them logx and logy) is equal to the log of the product of the numbers you were taking the log of previously. (i.e. log(x*y))

Teti Omilana 1G
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:05 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Teti Omilana 1G » Tue Mar 09, 2021 10:19 pm

since p=(-log), you can use the log rules: log(pka)+log(pkb)=pka*pkb

Neha Gupta 2A
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:52 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Neha Gupta 2A » Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:11 am

I think it's because for pH and pKa you are able to add pH and pOH to get 14 and pKa +pKb to get 14. When [H] and Ka are in their regular form you can't add them together to get 14 because you haven't taken the -log of them.

George Hernandez 3I
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:52 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby George Hernandez 3I » Fri Mar 12, 2021 7:20 pm

Its basically the same as adding pH and pOH to get 14. The logarithmic properties allow you to add the pKa and pKb values to get pKw. But the concentrations themselves must be multiplied.

Pratika Nagpal
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2020 12:20 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Pratika Nagpal » Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:32 am

what is the difference between pka and ka and pkb and kb

Charisma Arreola 2F
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:37 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Charisma Arreola 2F » Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:36 am

I think it’s because of the difference and how small pKa values typically are.

Diana Aguilar 3H
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:50 pm

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Diana Aguilar 3H » Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:56 pm

I think it has to do with log rules, logab = log a + log b, and also because pKa and pKb are log functions.

Naomi Hernandez-Ramirez 1J
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2020 12:17 am

Re: pka vs ka

Postby Naomi Hernandez-Ramirez 1J » Tue Mar 16, 2021 8:32 am

Both pKa and pKb use -log values with the same base pKa+pKb is the same as saying -log(Ka*Kb)


Return to “Equilibrium Constants & Calculating Concentrations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests