osmotic gradient.

Discussion of all aspects of cellular structure, physiology and communication.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
student12
Death Adder
Death Adder
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:36 am

osmotic gradient.

Post by student12 » Thu May 25, 2006 8:04 am

I have a query wether or not insoluble molecules (eg:starch) within a solution will alter the osmotic gradient?
or does this only apply for soluble molecules?(eg:glucose)

Plz expain. Thank you.

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Thu May 25, 2006 5:56 pm

ok, so you can look at osmosis as simple(and facilitated!) diffusion of free water through the membrane down it's concentration gradient. Free water meaning the water that is not bounded by a molecule by any kinds of bonds(more molecules, higher concentration=>more bound water and a lower concentration of free water). Since insoluble molecules do not form intermolecular bonds with water they do not directly affect the diffusion of water across a membrane
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

Ultrashogun
Coral
Coral
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:48 am

Post by Ultrashogun » Thu May 25, 2006 6:18 pm

The above poster is correct, but another thing you might want to look at is the formula for osmotic pressure:

pi = C R T

The C stands for concentration of the solution and since unsolved substance makes an emulsion or suspension those moles do nothing towards the osmotic pressure.

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Fri May 26, 2006 5:30 pm

@Ultrashogun

Don't do that! Never do that. That's what my teachers do and i'm never happy with it. Don't throw a formula like with a slingshot. If you are going to give someone a formula, explain how it was obtained, for them to actually understand. Although my post was a little explanation, it can't by far explain your formula.
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

Ultrashogun
Coral
Coral
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:48 am

Post by Ultrashogun » Fri May 26, 2006 7:48 pm

Well sorry, but the point was never the formula, but what aspects the osmotic pressure depends on.

The formula is obtained from the general gas law:

P V = n R T --> P = pressure, V = Volume, n = number of mols, R = gas constant , T = absolute temperature

divide by V to obtain:

P = n R T / V

we know from the formula for molarity that C = n / V, so:

P = C R T, we then call this pressure "pi".

You can get the general gas law from the laws of Gay-Lussac and Boyle.

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Sat May 27, 2006 11:05 am

That's much better. You are on your way to becoming a good teacher :)
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

2810712
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:19 pm

Post by 2810712 » Sat May 27, 2006 11:52 am

Hey people kinetic theory of gases neglects any intermolecular forces! so you can't relate bound water' to it that way. Many times i hate it when teachers neglect this assumption of kinetic theory of gases. Also, without considering intermolecular forces u can't explain [ not prove] how is Cp>Cv on the molecular level.
From Atkins Phy Chem. first law of thermodynamics neglects intermolecular forces as the Kinetic theory of gases does. & then we apply the energy conservation!
So, the text-book thermodynamics is like most text-chapters immpractical!
See intermolecular forces ain't that negligible always. Also in the equation deltaE=q-delta(n)RT , we take T constant but still we don't take delta E as zero! This can only be explained by the intermolecular forces...

Do you think the same..?

Ved
Last edited by 2810712 on Sat May 27, 2006 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ultrashogun
Coral
Coral
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:48 am

Post by Ultrashogun » Sat May 27, 2006 11:59 am

2810712 wrote:Hey people kinetic theory of gases neglects any intermolecular forces! so you can't relate bound water' to it that way. Many times i hate it when teachers neglect this postulate of kinetic theory of gases. Also, without considering intermolecular forces u can't explain [ not prove] how is Cp>Cv on the molecular level.
From Atkins Phy Chem. first law of thermodynamics neglects intermolecular forces as the Kinetic theory of gases does. & then we apply the energy conservation!
So, the text-book thermodynamics is like most text-chapters immpractical!
See intermolecular forces ain't that negligible always. Also in the equation deltaE=q-delta(n)RT , we take T constant but still we don't take delta E as zero! This can only be explained by the intermolecular forces...

Do you think the same..?

Ved


Im sorry but I just dont see the relevance for this.

2810712
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:19 pm

Post by 2810712 » Sat May 27, 2006 3:09 pm

apologise friends...that was a little off-topic,
] but as u quoted the formula PV=nRT, which is also derived with the help of kinetic theory of gases i just put my thoughts about it, sorry, still i want ur views about the previous post...
sorry...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests