Are there reactions that just do not/ can not ever reach equilibrium?

[Jenaye Brelland 2I]

Are there reactions that just do not/can not ever reach equilibrium? Or does all chemical reactions, no matter what, always reach equilibrium?

[Arezo Ahmadi 3J]

Every chemical reaction should have the potential to reach equilibrium given that it has the right conditions to reach the reaction's equilibrium constant. This could depend on things like time, since reactions need time to occur and reach that equilibrium constant.

[Margia Adriano 2A]

Hi! I believe that all reactions should reach equilibrium. For every forward reaction, there needs to be a reverse reaction and vise versa and there will always be a point where the rates of the reverse and forward reactions are equal. I hope this helps!

[Isabelle Hales 1J]

Going off of this, are there any chemical reactions that only proceed in one direction (and thus wouldn't have an equilibrium)?

[Eliot Kagan 2G]

Every chemical reaction should have the potential to reach equilibrium given that it has the right conditions to reach the reaction's equilibrium constant. This could depend on things like time, since reactions need time to occur and reach that equilibrium constant.

I think that there are reactions that run until all the reactants are depleted. This would be indicated by the one-way arrow.
You can find more info at https://bio.libretexts.org/Under_Construction/Purgatory/Core_(Britt's_page)/Directionality_of_Chemical_Reactions%23

[Anya Holbrook 1E]

I believe that every reaction that has a double arrow can go to equilibrium, just the amount of time it takes or the temperature it needs differs, but reactions with only a forward pointing arrow cannot, because the reactants are used to completion in those cases.

[Pranav Daggubati 3C]

One way reactions are usually the reactions that can't do this. However, just because they are denoted as going in one way does not mean that they can never go back. It's just that the conditions needed to be met are almost never possible.

[Chelsea_Guzman_3C]

Everything that goes up, must come down. Therefore, I believe almost every reaction must reach a certain equilibrium in order to be executed properly.

[Christine Ma 3L]

Reactions that take place in closed systems should reach equilibrium, given enough molecules are present. On the other hand, reactions in open systems won't reach equilibrium because reactants/products are lost.

Going off of this, are there any chemical reactions that only proceed in one direction (and thus wouldn't have an equilibrium)?

I believe that every reaction that has a double arrow can go to equilibrium, just the amount of time it takes or the temperature it needs differs, but reactions with only a forward pointing arrow cannot, because the reactants are used to completion in those cases.

In the real world, every reaction is reversible to an extent, as a reaction that is completely irreversible would have an equilibrium constant of infinity. Even reactions with a one-sided arrow are an equilibrium in a closed system. In these cases, the equilibrium constant is just incredibly high and the concentration of reactants is so low we say that the reaction has gone to completion.

[Jaden Joodi 3J]

I did a little research and it would appear that the only way a reaction could not reach equilibrium, would be if the K value was incredibly small or incredibly large. For example, if the K value was something like K = 10^30, it would mean that there would be 10^30 molecules of the product for every 1 molecule of the reactant. If there was not enough molecules of the product, then the reaction would technically never reach equilibrium. I don't think this is very important or realistic, so I would not worry about it to much.

[Luveia Pangilinan 1A]

If not all, almost all reactions should reach equilibrium!

[Nick P 3D]

I believe all reactions will eventually reach equilibrium as long as there is the enough reactants to get it going!

[Anna Lockhart 2B]

Is it ever necessary to know how long it will take for the reaction to create equilibrium in order to solve an equation?

[Anna Martin 2l]

For now, I don't think it's necessary to know the certain amount of time needed to reach equilibrium for problems!

[Jonathan Malau 1F]

I think that all reactions can theoretically reach equilibrium, as long as the system remains undisturbed.

[Truman Chong Dis 3G]

I believe combustion reactions do not reach chemical equilibrium but are able to reach thermal equilibrium. This just means that the reaction stops when the heat energy of the products equal to that of the reactants. However, the reverse reaction cannot occur as combustion reactions are non-equilibrium systems that produce water and carbon dioxide which are much more stable than the reactants that they came from and are unable to to react with each other to form the reactant.

[Ansh Patel 2I]

Hi! Assuming that there are enough reactants, almost all reactions will reach equilibrium.

[Jenaye Brelland 2I]

A reactant can be used until completion even though the product can be decomposing due to the reverse reaction? Is it because the reverse reaction would be slower than the forward reactions so the reactants/reagents would be used up first, resulting in an only forward reaction? I'm not sure if I am understanding that correctly.

[Jenaye Brelland 2I]

I believe combustion reactions do not reach chemical equilibrium but are able to reach thermal equilibrium. This just means that the reaction stops when the heat energy of the products equal to that of the reactants. However, the reverse reaction cannot occur as combustion reactions are non-equilibrium systems that produce water and carbon dioxide which are much more stable than the reactants that they came from and are unable to to react with each other to form the reactant.

Oh that is good to know. Thank you!