Talk:Exothermic process

Altered Image

Although the image was clear in explaining the topic, I considered the flames a little childish for an encyclopædia so removed them. --Shastrix 20:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Writing Problems With the Article

There seem to be some problems with the article that make it hard to follow.

1) There appears to be a missing equation after the second paragraph.

2) In the fifth paragraph, the second sentence is somewhat confusing, perhaps because of a mis-statement. I wonder if this sentence should instead read "The enthalpy change, ΔH, of a chemical reaction is much easier to measure than to calculate." As the sentence is currently phrased, it seems to contradict the ideas being expressed.

3) Endothermic and Exothermic give different derivations of the the suffix -thermic , if how it is now is correct, maybe it should be explained why it is why it is.

Please do not merge these separate 6 pages

The merge debate goes back to '05 (see: Talk:Endergonic). The result of the debate was to not merge. Moreover, it is standard protocol, e.g. according to both The Essential Dictionary of Science (Clark 2004) and the A to Z Dictionary of Thermodynamics (Perrot 1998), to have separate entries for such closely-related but subtly-different topics such as:

• Exothermic – a process or reaction that involves the release of energy; usually in the form of heat.
• Exothermic reaction – a chemical reaction in which heat is given out.

As well as for the other terms: endothermic, endothermic reaction, etc. For example, the melting of an ice-cube is an endothermic process; combustion evolves an exothermic reaction, warm-blooded animals are endothermic, arguing with other Wikipedians is an endergonic activity, etc. Help us expand on these separate stubs, but please don't merge. Wikipedia has unlimited storage space. Articles are sure to grow. Thanks:--Sadi Carnot 17:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Someone fix the caption!

'Explosions are the most violent and exothermic reactions.' This makes no sense, can someone re write this caption, preferably someone who unlike me knows what the author is trying to say. thanks! 203.219.254.130 (talk) 09:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC) Justin

Don't merge them!

Exothermic and Exothermic reaction should NOT be mixed, as Exothermic refers mainly to Physics and Exothermic Reactions are Chemistry related! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.199.135 (talk • contribs) 03:06, June 2, 2009

I agree. Those who have physics related enquiries should be directed to Exothermic and those with chemical related enquiries should be directed to Exothermic Reactions. Please do not merge them! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.62.240 (talk • contribs) 15:49, April 13, 2010

Can I also say, likewise for Endothermic - why have these been merged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.62.240 (talk • contribs) 15:52, April 13, 2010

'Exothermic' may relate to a physical process (like vapour condensation) or to a chemical reaction. Why should we merge them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Novikovs (talk • contribs) 19:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

MERGE!

The best thing to do is to merge them. Since Exothermic Reaction in Chemistry and Exothermic in Physics are the same concept, it is best to do so so that the reader obtains the most information out of what he/she is searching for. --Sam (talk) 06:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism to talk page

Just for clarity, I have manually reverted some vandalism from some time back. The diffs I have reverted are: this and this. I hope this accurately restores what the original comments were. David Hollman (Talk) 12:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

this one too. David Hollman (Talk) 12:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

exothermic . exothermic reaction

Do merge these sections. this is too simplistic. please change them. if only for cross reference and thermodynamic accuracy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.62.194.229 (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Exothermic reaction and kinetic particle theory

The last paragraph of the Overview section seems to suggest that all exothermic reactions convert the bond energy into translational (+other forms of) energy of the molecules in the reaction mixture via photons? If we consider a simple neutralization reaction HCl+NaOH, the energy released is mainly from the formation of bonds between the H+ and OH- ions (ignoring hydroxonium ions and solvation shell issues). Does this mean that the temperature of the mixture rises due to the release of photons from the H-OH bond formation, which is then absorbed by other molecules around? If not, then what is the main mechanism for the conversion of bond energy into translational kinetic energy of the molecules in a reaction mixture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LawrenceLauCY (talk • contribs) 08:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm guessing here, but if an H+ and OH- collide head-on, if they are not to rebound completely, there must be non-bond energy absorbed, so that means excited electrons and resultant photons. If they do not collide head-on, then they may bond and store energy as rotation or vibration, and this rotational and/or vibrational energy will then be dissipated in subsequent collisions. PAR (talk) 07:10, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Calories or Joules?

I was just about to fix this article so that it uses SI units when I thought it might be an idea to check the Talk page first, in case anyone had posted a valid reason for retaining the universally deprecated (outside the health & fitness community) imperial unit. There doesn't appear to be any mention and I don't normally ask for consensus before performing minor fixes like this, but I may as well ask while I'm here; anyone have a valid objection? Blitterbug 04:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)