Eyore
New member
http://www.seafriends.org.nz/oceano/seawater.htm#composition
i put this link up to illustrate what i am getting at
of interest to me is the mmol x valence "statement" and it infering the values are correct. lets ignore the fluoride value lol
1. if i calculate the respective values for a salt (eg potassium chloride or calcium chloride), i find the values for anion and cation to be almost equal.
so my question- i am summising (i believe correctly), that actually the respective mmol x valence to be exsactly equal, and the reason it doesnt calculate exsactly is simply because the molar masses are abbreviated?
in which case does any body have a link which has full molar masses to a lengthier decimal?
I also think its fair to say that the statement " the fact the above values for seawater are very close to a zero value for mmol x valence promotes it must be close to correct" is utter rubbish! because infact you could throw whatever you want in and a zero value will be reached? The same applies to balling recipes in terms of ionic balance ( at the point it is inputted)
consequently is it fair to say then that these "seawater calculators" are to all intents and purposes a theoritical balance of ions and realistically little more, ie its theory not tested??
so what about minor elements measured in picogrammes /litre?? this bit does baffle me, i assume its not tested at those levels, so where do the figured come from for these trace elements?
my last question is regarding impurity in balling salts
if i am correct regarding the salt being perfect anion and cation balance, the same would apply to the impurities i imagine?? so lead would be present with the correct amount of sulphate or chloride?? etc etc
feel free to criticise lol
i am no chemist, but my maths forces me to question these things
i put this link up to illustrate what i am getting at
of interest to me is the mmol x valence "statement" and it infering the values are correct. lets ignore the fluoride value lol
1. if i calculate the respective values for a salt (eg potassium chloride or calcium chloride), i find the values for anion and cation to be almost equal.
so my question- i am summising (i believe correctly), that actually the respective mmol x valence to be exsactly equal, and the reason it doesnt calculate exsactly is simply because the molar masses are abbreviated?
in which case does any body have a link which has full molar masses to a lengthier decimal?
I also think its fair to say that the statement " the fact the above values for seawater are very close to a zero value for mmol x valence promotes it must be close to correct" is utter rubbish! because infact you could throw whatever you want in and a zero value will be reached? The same applies to balling recipes in terms of ionic balance ( at the point it is inputted)
consequently is it fair to say then that these "seawater calculators" are to all intents and purposes a theoritical balance of ions and realistically little more, ie its theory not tested??
so what about minor elements measured in picogrammes /litre?? this bit does baffle me, i assume its not tested at those levels, so where do the figured come from for these trace elements?
my last question is regarding impurity in balling salts
if i am correct regarding the salt being perfect anion and cation balance, the same would apply to the impurities i imagine?? so lead would be present with the correct amount of sulphate or chloride?? etc etc
feel free to criticise lol
i am no chemist, but my maths forces me to question these things