Talk:Caesium hydroxide

Chemicals: Core Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This is a core article in the WikiProject Chemicals worklist.

Occupational Safety and Health Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"...it behaves very much like rubidium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide but even more vividly than they do."

The wording here seems odd; can anyone think of a better word than vividly. This sentence also does not specify what reactions this behavior is occuring in. Perhaps it should be removed/revised. --71.227.190.111 00:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is this better? Also, added reference to how strong cesium metal reacts with water (very violently - stronger than all the alkaline metals) Joeylawn 03:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

What is the pH for CsOH?

Depends on concentration, but concentrated CsOH (aq) will peak at 14.0, the maximum for water. The pKb of CsOH is -1.76, so it has the ability to ionized futher. 151.200.33.73 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Then the article is displaying the wrong value for pKb, since it is listed as 1.76. I'd like someone to rectify the situation if the value listed is indeed wrong. 193.126.152.63 (talk) 13:47, 21 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic