THE THEORY OF ACIDS AND BASES

By F. M. HALL, )1.SC.

Wollongong University College, N.S. W. , Australia

The theory of acids and bases, like many and the term hydrolysis relates to the inter-
other chemical theories, has undergone action of the ions of the salt with water to
numerous changes in recent times. Always give (a) a weak acid or a weak base, or (b) a
the changes have been such as to make the weak acid and a weak base.
theory more general. The three main Applying the Law of l\llass Action to such
theories in use today are: a system, the hych·olysis constant, at equili-
(l ) the Water or Arrhenius Theory; brium, may be written as
(2) the Proton or Br0nsted- Lowr.v l [Base] [Acid] [OH-) [HA)
Theory; (" = (Unhydrolysed salt] = [A- ]
(3) the Electronic or Lewis Theory.
and if x is the extent to which hydr olysis
WATEl~ OR AlmHENIUS 'l'HEORY occurs and c is the molar concentration of salt
The Water or Arrhenius Theory was in solution
widely accepted up to the early years of this xcx xc x 2c
century . It defines an acid as a hydrogen K" = (1 - x)c = (1 - x)
compound ionizing in water to give hydrogen The equilibria involved for the salt of a
ions, and a base as a hy<iToxyl compound weak acid and strong base in water are
which gives hydroxide ions in water. The
neutralization reaction between an acid and · _ rH+] [OR-)
(a) H 2 0 ~ H+ + OR- ; li. = [HzO]
a base produces a salt and water only:
HA(ac id) + BOH(base) ""' BA(salt) + [H +] [A - ]
H 2 0(water) (b) HA ~ H+ + A-; Xa = [HA]
and the salts so formed may be classified into (c) A-+ H 20 ~ HA + OR- ;
four main groups, viz.:
, [I'IA) [OR - ]
(i) those derived from strong acids and Xb = [A- ) [H20J
strong bases ;
Since [H20] is effectively constant in dilute
(ii) those derived from weak acids and solutions we may replace]( and Kh' by two
strong bases ; new constants, Kw and J(h r espectively,
(iii) those derived from strong acids and defined by
weak bases;
Xw = [H +) [OR-]
(iv) those derived from weak acids and _ [.HA] [OR-]
weak bases. and }7
'-h - [A- )
When dissolved in water these various salts
do not necessarily give neutral solutions. Kw is called the ionic product of water and
Interaction between the salt and water has a value of ,...._, 10- 14 mole2 litre- 2 at 25°C.
(hydrolysis) accounts for the acidity, alka- It follows that
linity or neutrality of the solution. For K,. _ [H+] [OR- ] [HA] _ [OH-] [HA) _ K
11
example, a salt BA derived from a weak acid Ea - [H+) [A-] - [A ) -
HA and a strong base BOH gives an alkaline
If two assumptions are now made:
solution in water because the acid derived by
hydrolysis gives few hydrogen ions and the (i) that there is only a pure aqueous
base derived by hydrolysis gives many solution of the salt of the acid HA (no
hydroxide ions. This may be shown as added hydrogen or hydroxide ions) ;
B+ + A -+ H 20 ""' IIA + B + + OR- and
91
92 EDUCATION IN CHEl\flSTRY

(ii) that the concentration of hydroxide A solution then is not necessarily neutral at
ion obtained from the ionization of pH 7 but rather when the hydrogen ion con-
water is negligible compared with that centrat ion is equal to the hydroxide ion
resulting from the hydrolysis of t he concentration. However, at 25°C a neutral
salt, solution has a pH of 7 and all subsequent
then [OH- ] = [HA] during hydrolysis of the salt, calculations refer to this temperature.
[OH- F Kw PROTO~ OR BR0NSTED- LO\VRY TTIEORY
ancl [A-] = ! { 11 = K;;
a nd [OH- ] = J[A-]. ] (,.
Kw
The Arrhenius Theory makes use of
hydroxide ions, which may not exist in non-
aqueous solvents, and does not cover weak
J(w bases. In 1923 Bnmsted and Lowry put
but [H +] = [OH - J forward a more general t heory of acids and
hence [H +] = JK IC w •
[A- ]
bases which incorporates all protonic solvents,
and not just water. They defined an acid as
a substance ·which yields a prot on and a base
or pH = ?- pKw + t piCa + -~ log c as a substance which can combine with a
where c = [A-], the stoichiometric molar proton.
concentrat ion of t he salt.* This is only Thus an acid HB dissociates to give a
justified if the hydr olysis of the salt is very proton and its conjugate base. Alternately a
small. base B can combine with a proton to yield the
This equation then allows calculation of the conjugate acid BH+ of the base. In general
pH of an aqueous soh1tion of a salt or the pH terms, this may be written as
at the equi valence point of a weak acid- str ong
Acid 1 + Base 2 "" Acid 2 + J:3ase1
base titra.tion.
Similarly for a strong acid-weak base in which t he proton is pat•titioned between
system the pH is given by two bases and the equilibrium constant is
determined by t he relat ive affinities for the
pH = t pi(,,. - ·~· pKb - -~ log c proton.
where J(b is t he ionization constant of the A Br0nsted acid may be an electrically
base and c is the molar concentration of the neutral molecule, e.g. HCI, a cation , e.g.
salt. C6 H 5~TH 3 + , or an anion, e.g. H S0 4- , whilst a
It should be noted that ICv, the ionic Br0nsted base may be a neutral molecule,
product of water, like any other equilibrium e.g. aniline C6H 5NH2 , or an anion , e.g. Cl-.
constant, varies with temperature. Table I One important result of this defini tion of an
illustrates this point. acid is t hat the strength of an acid depends
upon its environment. The acidic strength
TABLE I of a weak acid is etihanced by its solution in a
strongly basic solvent and the basic strength
pH of neutral solutiort of a weak base is enhanced by its solution in
Temp. ' C Kw x 10 1'1 [H+] = [OH- ]
- ---·-1--- -- 1 - - - - - - - - - a st rongly acidic solvent . In fact, all acids
0 0·1139 7·47 tend t o become indistinguishable in strength
10 0·2920 7· 27 in strongly basic solvents. This is known as
20 0·6809 7·085
25 1·008 6·998 the levelling effect of the solvent.
30 1 · ~69 6·915 Solvents may be protophilic, protogenic or
40 2·919 6·77
50 5·474 6·63
aprotic. If a solvent exhibi ts both prot o-
60 9·614 6·5 1 philic and protogenic properties it is termed
a.mphiprotic. Examples of each form are
*pH is here defined as pH = - log[H +], i.e. in protophilic solvents-ethers, ammines
terms of concentration rather t han activ ity of t he (basic substances);
hydrogen ion . This is done for the sake of s im -
plicity in t his and in all subsequent calculations in protogenic solvents- sulphuric acid
this article. (acidic substan ces);
 THE THEORY OF ACIDS A.1'<D U.A.SES
amphiprotic solvents-water, acetic acid,
alcohols;
aprotic solvents-benzene, chlor oform
('inert' substances).
Actually, these definitions involve a modern
extension of the Bn'insted- Lowry theory,
which might be termed the 'auto-protolysis
theory,' viz. that in a solventS in which the
equilibrium
2S .= A ++ B -
occurs, an acid is any substance whose dis-
solution increases the concentration of A+ and
a base is any substance which increases the
concen tration of B- .
Thus when water ionizes, the equation may
be written as
H 20 + H 20 <=' H 3 0 + + OR-
where one molecule of water is beh avin g as
an acid and another as a base (amphiprotic).
Similarly for acetic acid
CH3 COOH + CH 3 COOH <=' CH 3COOH2 + + but glacial acetic acid, a solvent more proto-
CJ:I.3COO-
one acetic acid is acting as a p roton donor
(acid) and the other as a proton acceptor
(base) .
Again, ammonia ionizes as follows:
~1-J 3 + NH 3 <=' NH,, + + .::\TH2 -
and acids arc those substan ces which, in
liquid ammonia, increase the concen tration of
NH4 +.
It follows then that a substance which
ftmctions as an acid in one solvent docs not
n ecessarily react in this way in another
solvent. Urea, for example, is a weak base in
water, a stronger base in acetic acid and yet
is an acid in liquid ammon ia.
H 20 + H 2K·CO·NH2 <=' H2~ · CO·NH3 + ..L OH-
acid, -r base 2 acid 2
CH3 COOH + H 2N ·CO·NH2 <='
acid1 + base2
H 2N ·CO·l\TH3 + + CH3COO-
aci d 2 -+- base1
).1H3 + H 2~ · CO ·NH 2 .= NJ:I,,+ + H 2i\'"·CO ·NJ:-I -
base1 + acid2 acid 1 + base2
Strictly the pH unit is limited to dilute
aqueous solutions. The useful range of the
p H scale is 0 to ] 4 and is fixed by the auto-
protolysis constant for water. If the relative
93
strengths of what, in water, are normally
termed strong acids are to be determined,
t h en solvents other than water have to b e
used. This n ecessitates the use of other
acidity sca.les, the most familiar of which is
probably the Hammett acidity scale.
For example, the acids perchloric, hydro-
chloric and nitric appear equally strong in
water where the strongest acid that can exist
is the hydroxonium ion, H 3 0 +, but in other
solvents jheir strengths differ because of
variation in the ease of formation of the
solvated proton in that particular solvent.
The basicit y and d ielectric constant* appear
to be th<: principal factors in the manifesta-
tion of acidity.
Since the extent of acidic and basic dis-
sociation is influen ced by the ability of the
solvent to accept or donate protons, the same
solute may be dissociated to widely differ ent
degrees in d ifferent solven ts. F or example,
ammonia is not highly protonatccl in water,
genic than water, induces extensive protolysis.
.::\TH3 -! CH.3 COOH .= ~ H, - + CH3 COO-
Again, sulphuric acid is over four hundred
times as acidic in acetic acid as in water at
the same con centration. Such systems are
often referred to as 'super-acid systems.'
P erchloric acid may be dissolved in acetic
acid to give a solution containing CH3 COOH2+
ions, and, as this ion can readily give up a
proton to react with a base, the solu tion is
strongly acidic. On the other hand acetic
acid may itself donate protons to a suitable
base . This acidic property will exert a
levelling e:ffect on a weak base, which will
thus have its basic properties enhanced.
Thus the titration of perchloric acid with
pyridine in water fails to give a satisfactory
end-point, but the same titr ation in glacial
acetic acid is quite successful. The reactions
involved are
HC10,1 + CH3 COOH <=' CH3 COOH2 + + Cl04 -
C5H5N + CH3COOH <=' C5H 5N H + 7 CH 3 COO-
CH3COOH2+ , CH3coo- <=' 2CH3COOH
Adding, H C10 4 - C5 H 5 ::\ <=' C5 H 5 NH+ -:- CL0 4 -
* Tho Dob~·e-Hu ckd equation allows t.he eiTecv
of changes of dielect ric con stant on t h e fw1ctional
relationship b etween the activity coefficien t of tho
ionic species and t.lw ionic strcngth t o h e tak en into
.:u•count.
 04 EDUCATIO~-
The intrinsic strength of an acid HA in a
particular solvent, then, is formally expressed
by its acidity constant in that solvent, and
the relationship between a base and its
conjugate acid makes it unnecessary to deal
with basic dissociation constants when the
solvent is amphiprotic.
The Bnilnsted theory evidently differs from
the Arrhenius theory in the followi11g ways:
(i) proton transfer processes only need be
considered (protonation and d.eproto-
nation);
(ii) the term hydrolysis is no l onger
necessary ;
(iii) the value Kn can be neglected and the
strengths of all acids and bases can be
given by the J(J. value alone by con-
sidedng the conjugate acid of the base
and the value of the solvent ionization
constant (e.g. Kw).
To illustrate (iii) more clearly, a ca.lculation
involving the same system referred to under
t he Arrhenius Theory (p. 91) is more simply
derived from the Br0nsted approach.
In the reaction
HA + OH- ~ A- + H.O
acid1 + base 2 base1 + acfd2
[HA] = [OH-] at the equivalence point for
there is only the salt of HA in the solvent.
K = [HA] [OR-) = IC.
b [A- ] K ,.
since [H20] is effectively constant as before.
.. pOH = t piC.- t pK, - t log [A- )
But pOH = piC. - pH (pH + pOH = pKw
= 14 ac 25°C).
Hence
pKw - pH = tplCv - tpKa- tlog [A- )
or pH = i pKw + t pK. + t log c
where c is the molar stoichiometric concentra-
tion of the salt.
IN CHEl\U STRY
To explain further point (iii), consider a
weak acid, e.g. acetic acid, and a weak base,
e.g. ammonia.
According to the Arrhenius theory
. . [H+) [CH3 COO-]
K. (acecw ac1d) = CH COOH
3
or pKa = 4· 76
[~H4 +) [OH- ]
Kb (ammonia)
NH40H
= 4 ·75
However, in the Br0nsted sense there is no
need to invoke the presence of molecular
NH 40H (which probably does not exist) to
give pKb. Rather, using the conjugate acid
of the base, i.e. NH4 + ~ H + +
NH 3 , a pKa
value of 9·25 can be obtained for the ammo-
nium ion, since pKa + p]{b = pKw = 14.
The major weakness of the Br0nsted-
Lo"rry Theory is that it makes the definition
of an acid and a base as rigidly dependent
upon the solvent as does the Arrhenius
Theory. H owever, it does take into account
that there are solvents other than water
which exhibit typical basic properties, even
t hough it does not recognize the comple-
mentary data with regard to acids.
ELECTRONIC OR LEWIS THEORY
The L ewis Theory first introduced in 1923
is a mor e embr acing theory still than those
of Arrhenius and Br0nsted.
It is an electronic theory and the definitions
of acids and bases do not depend upon the
presence of any particular solvent.
An acid is defined as an electron-deficient
species or one that seeks a molecular species
containing available pairs of electrons. For
example, H +, N02 +, BF3 and AlCl3 are acids.
Bases are species which contain a pair of
electrons capable of being donated to another
species. For example, 01- , H 20, OH-, :t\TH3 ,
ethers, esters and ketones are bases.
Searching for a property common to all
acids, or that common to all bases, Lewis
concluded that acids and bases correspond
respectively to what Sidgwick later called
'acceptor' and 'donor ' molecules. Neutraliza-
tion is the formation of a co-ordinate covalent
bond between t he acid and the base.
 THE THEORY OF ACIDS A~D BASES 95
For example, more usual neutralizat ion of pyridine by a
H ++ :O: H - -+ H:O:H proton-donating acid:
acid
Cl
base
H Cl H (froma
H +1 + ' -;/'~ -';
'=/
[n' -q--']
~
+1

I I I I proton donor)
Cl- H + :~-H -+ Cl- B:N-H

Cl
I
H
I I I
Cl H
CI-
Cl
I
A!
I
-L, • , .
.
.:?-,
-''==/
""'
Cl
I~
-+ Cl- AI: ~·
I
)
The base donates a share in a lone pair of "=/'
electrons to the acid to form the co-ordinate Cl Cl
covalent bond bct,Yeen the two. Formation Agai n solutions of boron trifluoride or
of this bond is always to be considered the sulphur trioxide in inert solvents bring about
first step, even though ionization may subse- colour changes in indicators very similar to
quently take place. In the above case of those produced by protonic acids. These
boron trichloride and ammonia, ionization changes can be reversed by adding bases so
does not occur after neutralization. In othct· that a titration is possible; yet no proton is
cases, however, the electrical 'strain' produced involved.
by the formation of the co-ordinate covalent The major di ·advantage of the Lewis
bond is sufficient to result in ionization of the system appears when its qua ntitative aspect
neutralization product, as when alumin ium is considered. The protonic acids make up a
brom ide reacts with pyridine. group which show greater uniformity than do

~~·
Br:~ +
#~
:K~=
[ ~.r
Br :~.l: <=>l =
-~Br
:~r: ~~=~J
]+
Br Hr _j ~J3r

Lewis was concerned with broadening the
basis of the acid- base definition from both
the experimental and theoretical standpoints.
He chose four familiar experimental criteria,
viz. neutralization, titration with indicators,
displacement and catalysis, and defined as
acids and bases all substances which exhibit
the ability to take part in these 'typical'
functions . On the theoretical side he related
these properties to the acceptance and dona-
tion of electron pairs irrespective of whether
the t ransfer of protons was involved.
The scope of the electronic theory is suffi-
ciently broad to include the proton-transfer
definition of an acid, and, since electron-
donor molecules are able to combine with
protons, the Lewis concept of a base embraces
the 13r!1nsted-Lowry definition. On the other
hand the Lewis definition of an acid embraces
many substances which do not contain a
hydrogen atom, and consequently radically
increases the number of acids over those as
defined by the Br0nsted concept.
For example, it is evident that precisely the
same principles are involved in the reaction of
aluminium chloride with pyridine as in the
the non-protonic acids of the Lewis definition,
when related to any simple system of acid-
base strengths.
A ftu·ther disadvantage is that certain sub-
stances which experimentally behave like
acids, e.g. HCl and C02 , have electronic
formulae which, as usually written, do not
show the possibility of their acting as electron-
pair acceptors. Such acids and bases are
called 'secondary' by Lewis as distinct from
his 'primary' acids and bases which involve
electron-pair sharing. This introduces a
cumbr ous name fo1' common substances a nd
raises the question of t he value of the term
'acid ' as commonly used.
CALCULATIONS ni' ACID- BASE TITRATIOXS
Each of the above theories presents certain
difficulties, and a practical point at issue is
which theory is able to clearly and quantita-
t ively assist in calculations involving acid-
base systems. The Arrhenius Theory is
restricted to water as the solvent. The Lewis
Theory covers more completely substances
that show the qualitative attributes normally
associated with acids. The Br0nsted-Lowry
 96 EDUCA'l'lON IN CHEMIS1'RY

acids, on the other hand, form a more uniform protogenic character of the conjugate acid of
g roup and obey the quantitative relationships the base. Beyond t he equivalence point
confined to this group. (pH < 7) the pH change is due only to the
F or this reason , and because a solvent is d il ution effect of the strong acid .
normally used in simple acid- base systems, The pH values can be calculated from the
the Br~nsted-Lowry approach is generally following equations:
used in the following calculations of acid- base Before addition of any acid:
t itrations.
pH '--' ! pJ\",.. -t t pE~ + } log c (base)
l. St1·ong Acicl - Strong Ba.se 'l'itmtion Cp to the equi,·alenco point:
The pH change is due only to the clilut ion H _ -r c (salt)
P p1\.. w P1~,, - 1ogc(baso)
effect and the neutralization of some of the -

acid or base. l3oth acid and base are fu lly c (salt)

dissociated, and calculations involve a sess- - pJ(,.b - log c (base)
ing the actual acid or base concentration
At the cquivttlenco point:
before and after the equivalence point. The
cqui,,alcnce point in water is at pH 7 at 25°0. pH = t pi\:,. - { pKb - } log c (salt)
= ~ pKab - } log c (salt)
Example: If to 50 m l of O·lN H OI, 20 ml of
O·lN NaOH are added, the total acid con- where p Ko.b r efers to the conjugate acid of the
cent ration is 30 ml of O·lN in a volume of base and is equal to pJ(,. - pKb.
70 ml.
[H +) = ~ X 0·1 or pH = 1·37
4. W ealc Acid- W ealc Base 'l'itmtion
70 The pH change tru·oughout is due to
If to 50 mlofO·lN H OI, 51 mlofO·l N NaOH clilution, neutralization and the proton
are added, the total hyru·oxide ion concentt·a- affinities of the conjugate acid a nd conjugate
1 base. This t,vpe of titration is rarely u ed,
tion is X 0·1, or pOH = 4·0, or pH = 1 0·0.
but calculations may be made from the
101
equations under (2) and (3) above, except
2. Weal.; .d cicl- S trong Base Titmtion that at the equh·alence point itself the pH is
The pH change, up to the region of the given by
equivalence point, is due to the dilution
effect, neutralization of the acid and the
pH = !-pl(,. + 4 pi{. - -}plCb = -,tpK,. - ~ pKab
protophilic character of the conjugate base. where pKo.b again refers to the conjugate acid
Beyond the equivalence point the pH change of the base.
is d ue only to the dilution effect of the strong
base. The equivalence point occurs at a pH 5. Polyprotic rl cid8 wul Bc£ses
greater than 7 ·0 at 25°0.
In a polyprotic system, where transfer of
'l'he pH values can be calculated from the
more than one proton is involved, e.g. in
following equations:
H 3X., there are three dissociation constants:
Before any base is added:
- [H +) [H 2 X -)
pH = t pK. - ·i log c (acid) 1)..1 = [H 3X)
Titration up to equivalence point:
? (H+) (H...'\:.Z-)
c (sal~) l" z = [HzX )
pH = pJC., , log c (acid)
, [H+] (X3-]
A~ ~he equh·alence point: il..3 = [HX2 ]
pH = t pK. + ~ p i (,,. + t log c (salt).
Provided pK1 , pK2 and pK3 differ by at least
3. Strong .Acid- lVeak Base Titmtion four units, then each step, im·olving one
The pH change, up to the region of the proton transfer, proceeds ,-irtually to com-
equivalence point, is due to the dilution pletion (99·99 per cent for four units) before
effect, neutralization of the base and the the next neutra Lization ~tep commence:>.
 THE THEORY OF ACIDS AND BASE S 97
Such a titration will give two or three inflec- and arises because the rat io in the con centra-
tion points, and the pH at the first inflection t ions of the two coloured forms of the indi-
point is given by cator will vary continuously as the hydrogen-
pH = -} (pK1 + pJ(2) ion concentration is changed.
For ease in observing colour change,
which corresponds to the pH of the salt scr eened or mixed indicators may be used.
NaH2X. A screened indicator contains an indifferent
The pH at the second inflection point is dye which allows the colour change t o be
gi ven by more easily seen. A mixed indicator con -
pH = ~· (pK 2 + pK sists of a main indicator and an auxiliary
3)
indicator which indicates the approach of the
and corresponds t o the pH of the salt Na2HX. change point, or two indicators with over-
The appearance of a third inflection point lapping pH change_ The advantage of this
in the titration of H 3X with alkali depends latt er type is that a sharp colour change
upon t he pH of the solution of the salt Na3X occurs over a more limited pH range.
in relation to the pH of the solution when a For a substance or system of subst ances to
slight excess of the alkali titrant has been function satisfactorily as a pH indicator, the
added. change observed should satisfy the following
conditions:
DETECTION OF E:SD-POI:STS TI ACID- B ASE (i) the change should be a distinct one
TITRATIO~S
and should occur over the shortest
In all t itrations some means of detecting possible pH r ange;
the end-point or end -points is necessary. In (ii) the indicator change should be r ever-
acid- base systems two distinct techniques sible and the r eaction involved should
are commonly used: be rapid in both directions ;
(i) instrumental, e_g_ pH meter , con- (iii) the indicator should be sensitive, i .e.
ductivity cell ; only a small quantity should be
(ii) indicators. required to impart a distinct colour to
the solution.
Indicators which cover a wide range of the
pH scale are available, and it is necessary to Common pH indicator s, their colours and
select one whose colour change occur s at a pH ranges are given in Table II.
pH attained immediately after the equiva-
lence point is reached, that is, at the point 'l'ABLE II
wh0r e the rat e of change of pH with change of
vol ume of titrant is at a maximum. Naturally Colour
pH
thiil does not necessarily occur at pH 7 at 25°0. ~arne Acid Alkaline 1·ange
Indicators a.r e them selves weak acids or
Thy mol b lue - - r ed yellow 1·2-2·8
bases, and consequently the rat io of ionized :i\.fethyl orange . - red orange . 3·1- 4·4
to unionized form depends on the pH. For yellow
simplicity they may be considered as acting Bromo cresol bluo . _ yollow b lue 3·8- 5·4
Methyl r ed _ . -- red yellow 4·2- 6·2
like any ot her weak acid or base, that is B romothy m ol bluo yellow b lue 6 -0- 7·6
Cresol red -- yellow red 7·2- 8·8
Hin H + + In-
0 0

~ Phenolphthalein 0 0 colourless red 8·2-10·0

where H ln and In- are of different colour in Thy mol pht halein 0 0 colourless blue 9·3-10·5
the solution.
The chief char acterist ic of these indicators
is that the change from a pr edominantly SUMMARY
'acid' colour to a predominantly 'alkaline' Because of the gradual fusion of ideas on
colour is not sudden, but takes place over a acid- base t heory from which our present
pH range of about two units. This is termed concepts have sprung, the impor tance of this
the colour -change interval of the indicator t opic has extended far beyond the reaction of
98 EDUCATIO::< IN CHEl\'IISTRY
an acid and a base to give a salt and water.
Indeed cal culations of pH in acid- base
systems, as described a b ove, are only a part
of its usefulness.
The Br0nsted-Lowry definition has
initiated many investigations of acid- base
equilibria a nd kinetics in different solvent s,
whilst t h e Lewis con cept has led to much
valuable work on t he reactions of acceptor
molecules .
The following are but a few examples of
stu dies involving acid-base t h eories and.
serve t o illustrate the scope of t his field. :
(a) the forma.tion of t h e so-called
hydroxides of iron and other metals;
(b) determination of equilibrium and
stability constants of simple and
complex molecules, both organic and
inorganic;
(c) the role of sulphmic- n itric acid in
nitration processes;
(d) the use of lithium aluminium hydride
in t h e reduction of organic comp ounds.
There is, of course, a temptation when
deal ing with rival points of v iew to assu me
t hat one of t h em is 'right' and t h e other s
COU R SES AND SYl\1POSI A FOR
The following symposia have been arranged
by Local Sections of the Royal Institute of
Ch emistry in collaboration with the Associa -
tion for Science Education:
University of Liverpool, 25 April, 1964--
'New Techniques in Practical Ch emistry
for Schools.'
The School of P harmacy, Univer sity of
London, 2 May, 1964-'The Teaching of
Inorganic Chemistry at Pre-Univ ersity
Level.'
University of Leicester, 2 May, 1964--'The
Teaching of Chemistry in Schools.' (A
follow-up conference arising from the
symposium on the teaching of organic
chemistry held on 26 October, 1963. )
Manchester College of Science and Tech-
nology, 9 .May, 1964--'CHE.M Study-a
n ew look at the teaching of ch emistry.'
(Gu est Speaker , Professor J. Arthur
'wrong,' forgetting thn,t t h ey are only con-
venient, altogeth er artificial schemes for
classifying systems. No one of them is either
t rue or false and the differences are in degree,
not k ind. The choice between them sh ould
d epend solely upon t he region of chemistry
in which on e is op erating. The water t h eor y
is applicable to aqueous solutions, the proton
t h eory is prefer able for dealing with a variety
of solvent s, whilst the electronic theory
cover s acid b ehaviour in the absence of
protons.
FURTH ER READING
Bates, R. G ., Elect•·omet?-ic pH Detennination-~ .
Chap man & H all, L ondon, 1954.
Bell, H.. P. , The P•·oton in Ghemist•·y. Methuen &
Co., London, 1959.
Boll, R P., Qtw.1·t. R ev. Ghem. Soc., 1947, 1,113 .
Becket, A . H. , and Tin ley, E. H., Titmlions in
Non-A qtwous Solvents (bookleL) . Third Edition.
British Drug H ouses Ltd ., 1960 .
Bryson, A., Background to GhemisM·y (Editor : D. 1'.
:iH ellor), pp. 54-63. Tho University of No"·
South Wales, 1960.
Gold, V., p H .M.easunments: Thei•· Theory and
Pmctice. Methuen & Co., London, 1956.
Lucier, W. F ., and Zuffanti, S., ElecM·onic :L'heory of
Acids ctnd Bases. J ohn Wiley & Sons, New York .
1946.
Vogel, A. I., T extbook of Quantitative I norganic
Analysis. Third Edition. L ongmans, Green &
Co., London, 1961.
TEACHEl~S
Campbell, Director, CHE.M Study P ro -
ject.)
The following information has been received
from L oca1 Education Authorities about
courses for teachers that are being arranged
during t h e Summer Term :
Cambridgeshire Local Education Authority
(in collaboration with the Ministry of
Education), 13- 17 April, 1964--'Science
Teaching in t he Secondary School.'
Surrey Local Education Authority (King-
ston College of Technology), July, 1964-
'New appr oaches to teaching theor etical
an d practical chemist ry in secondary
schools.'
Somerset Local Education Authorit y (in
collaboration with the Ministry of Educa-
t ion), 27 April-1 May, 1964--'Science
Teaching in the Secondary School'