From: Linas Kudzma (lkudzma@earthlink.net)
Date: 01/02/03-09:27:33 AM Z
Judy,
The number is the oxidation state of the metal. It is redundant to say
ferric (III) when "ferric" implies that the oxidation state is Iron (III) or
Fe+3.
Linas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 1:00 AM
Subject: Another, different chemistry question (the numbers)
>
> I may need some opinion here, more than FACT...
>
> I've been trying to figure out (talking to alt photogs, contributors, et
> al) why we're supposed to put those numbers with the names of chemicals,
> like ferric (3) citrate, or maybe it's ferric (III) citrate.
>
> I find it confusing (OK, it's new since I had chemistry in 10th grade),
> and as far as I can tell doesn't add any information you don't have in the
> word forms. Am I any more likely to get right chemical with those
> numbers? My catalogs don't have them, just the names.
>
> It strikes me therefore -- ALSO the folks I talked to -- that it
> complicates the statement (or formula), sort of browbeating you by saying
> what's already said -- or a tautology, if you will, which is considered
> bad writing style.
>
> Ie, ferric means one thing & ferrous another, and if someone confuses
> them -- will those numbers unconfuse them ?
>
> HOWEVER, I may be missing something -- could be those numbers are
> important, and cutting them out would be bad & I shouldn't do it ?
>
> So -- (a) is it special information?. (b) do you find it helpful?, (c) do
> you mind if it's not there?
>
> any advice/comments appreciated...
>
> Judy
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST