nernst equation (cell potential vs physiological)

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DatInterviewDood

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2016
Messages
143
Reaction score
66
Screen Shot 2016-10-05 at 5.22.05 PM.png


Screen Shot 2016-10-05 at 5.22.13 PM.png


In the second equation (physiological application), it looks like the E stands for Ecell* (standard state) from the first equation, but where did the other Ecell term go? I believe that the second equation is derived from the first.

Members don't see this ad.
 
In the physiological case, you are generating the voltage from a charge imbalance, making it a concentration cell. There is no actual oxidation-reduction reaction taking place, so you omit the standard reaction potential (E˚). You can think of the Nernst Equation as the net voltage being a sum of the reaction voltage and the voltage from the difference in concentration of the two half cells: Eobserved = E˚redox reaction - RT/nF ln relative concentration. In general, the chemical reaction contributes a substantial amount (on the Voltage scale) and the concentration differences contributes a small amount (on the mV scale). Because the physiology example has no actual redox reaction, the voltages are small (on the mV scale) compared to chemical reactions.

You can also plug 1 in for z in the physiology example.
 
Top