Clarification on a few topics

[klownzo]

---

Members don't see this ad.

1) For the DAT, what are they looking for in terms of buret vs pipet? I've seen a lot of conflicting things. As of now I'm leaning towards buret for measuring and pipet for transferring

2) Should I include the d orbital as valence electrons on the DAT (if the d shell isn't filled..)? Destroyer says no but chad says yes

3) With NMR, a signal at 0 is just artifact correct? It is not counted towards the # of carbons and hydrogens?

Thanks!

 

[Alpha Centauri]

1) For the DAT, what are they looking for in terms of buret vs pipet? I've seen a lot of conflicting things. As of now I'm leaning towards buret for measuring and pipet for transferring

2) Should I include the d orbital as valence electrons on the DAT (if the d shell isn't filled..)? Destroyer says no but chad says yes

3) With NMR, a signal at 0 is just artifact correct? It is not counted towards the # of carbons and hydrogens?

Thanks!

You are correct on 1 and 3. Remember the fact that a buret measures to 2 decimal places, allowing for a better measurement than that of a pipet

 

[klownzo]

Thanks! Anyone have thoughts on #2?

Edit: I'm also wondering, is a ribosome an organelle??

 

[DMikes]

Thanks! Anyone have thoughts on #2?

Edit: I'm also wondering, is a ribosome an organelle??

I'm not sure i understand your second question. But technically, no, I don't believe a ribosome is considered an organelle.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

Thanks! Anyone have thoughts on #2?

Edit: I'm also wondering, is a ribosome an organelle??

Technically no but I remember reading the adea have said that a ribosome is an organelle

 

[klownzo]

For the second question, when the d sub shell is not filled, chad counts those electrons as valence electrons while destroyer does not. I'm not sure which thought process the DAT tests for