Costanzo Liu 1 Introduction The periodic table is made up of over 112 elements.

. With so many, there are several ways to tell them apart. Color, shape, melting point, and boiling point are a few of the intensive properties used to differentiate them. Because they are intensive properties, the numerical values do not change with change to mass. Specific heat (SH) and linear thermal expansion (LTE) will be used as the intensive physical properties for the experiments explained in this paper. The researchers were given two separate metals and were asked to identify if they were the same or different. The first metal tested would be the known and was found to be the metal molybdenum, Mo. The second metal type is unknown and will be tested to see if it is also Mo. Only SH and LTE were used to find the differences. The properties were found through experimentation and the values calculated were compared to the true values of molybdenum to see how closely they matched. To find the properties of specific heat, isolated systems were used for the experiment. In an isolated system, energy and matter cannot be exchanged outside the system. The metal rods were heated and the change in temperature when placed in room temperature water determined the value of specific heat for the metal. For the linear thermal expansion experiment, the rods initial lengths were measured. They were heated in boiling water and then placed on a jig to measure the change in lengths of the metals. After these experiments, the rods specific heat and linear thermal expansion values were revealed and that helped to identify if the second metal is the same as the first.

Costanzo Liu 2 Background Molybdenum was discovered by the Swedish chemist Carl Wilhelm Scheele in 1768. While doing research in the field, he determined that the mineral being mined was an unidentified element. He then decomposed the mineral in hot nitric acid and, heating what he got in the air, created a white oxide powder. Peter Jacob Hjelm then took Scheeles idea, chemically reduced the powder and obtained a dark metal powder. He named this element molybdenum, with the symbol Mo (Molybdenum History). Molybdenum is found in ores but not free in nature (Grolier Incorporated). Molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) is the chief molybdenum ore used for commercial production, collected by primary mines or by-product mining. The molybdenum disulfide is concentrated with flotation processes and then heated through a roasting process at high temperatures to produce molybdic trioxide (MoO3) by the chemical reaction:

2MoO2 + O2

2MoO3

The reaction shows the conversion from MoS2 to roasted MoO3 (Processing). In one molybdenum atom, there are 42 protons, 42 electrons, and 54 neutrons. The atomic mass is about 95.94 amu. Molybdenum has 6 valence electrons and 36 core electrons. This can be seen in the ionization energy. The 6th and 7th ionization energies experience a large jump between the enthalpies, or heat at constant pressure. This is because it takes more energy to remove a core electron than it does to remove a valence electron (Winter). Shown below is

Costanzo Liu 3 molybdenums electron configuration as one of the exceptions of the periodic table with a different electron configuration.

Figure 1. Molybdenum Paramagnetic Electron Configuration Figure 1 shows the electron configuration for molybdenum. Due to the unpaired electrons, the element is paramagnetic and will attract to an externally applied magnetic field ("Magnetic Properties of Solids"). Used frequently in alloys, molybdenum makes the metals stronger and increases heat resistance (Molybdenum Properties). Molybdenum has the fifth highest melting point on the periodic table, about 2,000F higher than the melting point of steel. Because of this, it is used in furnace parts and as a dry lubricant in space vehicles (Donahue). It is also used in light bulb filaments, gun barrels, stainless steels, flame-retardants, and paint pigments. Table 1 Intensive Properties of Molybdenum and Compared to Other Metals
Property Density (g/cm3) Specific Heat (J/gK) Thermal Expansion Coefficient (10-6/C) Melting Point (K) Molybdenum 10.22 0.25 4.8 2890 Niobium 8.57 0.27 7.3 2750 Tungsten 19.25 0.132 4.5 3695

Table 1 shows the intensive properties of three different metals (Gray). All three metals are refractory metals and have high melting points above 2273 K, are solid at room temperature, and are remarkably resistant to wear (Barbalace). Since these properties are intensive, finding these properties values can help

Costanzo Liu 4 identify an unknown metals identity. For this experiment, the values for SH and the coefficient of LTE (will be used to identify the rods. Specific Heat Review of Literature Energy does not disappear and is not created, as stated in the First Law of Thermodynamics: it is instead constantly being transferred. Energy transfers are involved in exothermic and endothermic reactions. In exothermic reactions, heat is released from the studied system to the surroundings while endothermic reactions absorb heat into the system from the surroundings. Enthalpy describes the heat flow of the reaction and is synonymous to heat at constant pressure. Exothermic reactions have a negative enthalpy, indicating a system loss of heat. For endothermic reactions, enthalpy is positive with a system heat gain. Energy released from the system will always result in energy being absorbed by the surroundings, and energy absorbed by the system will always result in energy being released from the surroundings; thus, heat lost is equal to heat gained (Liu). The University of Massachusettss Department of Physics describe the procedure to measure the SH of a sample of aluminum metal (Experiment #2, the Specific Heat of Aluminum) with calorimetry, the measurement of heat changes (Chang). The amount of heat required to change a unit of the mass of a substance by one degree in temperature is SH (Potts). The mass of the metal was measured and placed into a beaker of boiling temperature until the metal was assumed to be the same temperature. The isolated system used was a calorimeter that measures the heat flow in a reaction. Made of two Styrofoam

Costanzo Liu 5 cups it was prepared and massed. Water at room temperature is added and the calorimeter is massed again, this time with the water inside. The initial temperatures of both containers were measured. After carefully transferring the aluminum to the calorimeter, the final temperature was measured when the water reached equilibrium so that the concentration of the reactant and product remained the same. The Department of Physics and Astronomy at Georgia State University has also published a set of procedures similar to the previously mentioned (Experiment 10), but instead of room temperature water, their procedures described the use of cold water and metal shots. With the easy-to-collect materials and simple procedure, these methods can be applied to the research project of finding the identity of the unknown metal in a classroom environment. Applying this experiment can identify the metal with learning the SH because each metal has a different SH. The calculation to find heat (q) is equal to SH (s) multiplied by mass (m) multiplied by the change in temperature, as shown in the relationship below: q = smT Heat energy is measured in the energy unit Joules. SHs unit of measurement is Joules per gram Kelvin. Mass is measured in grams as temperature is measured in Kelvin. To find only the SH of the metal given the required information of the water, set the equation to find the heat of the water to the heat of the metal as shown: smT = smT

Costanzo Liu 6 The left side of the equation is the measurements for the metal and the right side is the water. The calorimeter used to measure these properties of this research is as close to an isolated system as possible. Linear Thermal Expansion Review of Literature When an object is heated or cooled it goes through LTE (Temperature and Thermal Expansion). LTE is an intensive property that is the fractional change in length of a material for a unit change in temperature. No metal will have the same measurements as another. When there is an increase in temperature, the motion, or kinetic energy, of the molecules increases and the space between the atoms grow, resulting in the material to expand ("223 Physics Lab: Linear Thermal Expansion"). The coefficient of LTE is used in bimetallic strips for the construction of thermometers (Chapter 2 Thermal Expansion). When looking at LTE, the numbers calculated will allow the researchers to see if the second metal is the same as the first. To use LTE, a certain equation is used as shown below:

The change in length (L) when a solid is heated is equal to the initial length (Lo) times the change in temperature (T). The average coefficient of LTE () represents a fractional change in length for every degree change in temperature. The unit for the coefficient of LTE is 1/C). Temperature will be measured in Celsius and length will be measured centimeters (Coefficients of Linear Thermal Expansion).

Costanzo Liu 7 The Physics laboratory at the University of Toronto conducted an experiment to determine the coefficient of LTE () of two rods (Harrison). The experiment was conducted on one rod at a time and the use of a micrometer was applied for the experiment. For each, the initial length and temperature of the metal rod was measured and documented. Water at a set temperature was pumped through the rod and when thermal equilibrium was reached with the water, the rods change in length was recorded. Numerous trials were conducted afterward at different pre-determined temperatures. The coefficient of LTE was calculated with the equation mentioned previously and that confirmed what the metal of the rod was. The St. Louis Community College explains the procedures to find the alpha coefficient for metals ("Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion"). The lab uses a coefficient of LTE apparatus with multiple parts and it begins with heating water to boiling. The rods initial length is measured and the room temperature is assumed as the rods temperature. First inserted into the device, steam from the boiling water heats the rod until the internal temperature stabilizes to about 100C. The change in length is determined and recorded. The alpha coefficient is found with the use of the previously mentioned equation. The first experimental procedure can be applied to the research in a classroom setting because similar tools are available for use in the class. The second reference outlines the basic procedures that will occur for the data collection. The apparatus will be replaced with a simpler jig and the rod will be heated by being placed directly in the boiling water. The measurements found in

Costanzo Liu 8 the procedures can lead to the discovery of the unknown metal rods coefficient of LTE and then the metals identity. Problem Statement Can an unknown metal be identified using specific heat and the coefficient of linear thermal expansion ()? Hypothesis If the intensive properties, SH and the coefficient of LTE, can be determined and the margin of error calculated is within a 6.7%, then the identity of the unknown metal can be identified as molybdenum. Data Measured SH and LTE will be used to test the known and unknown metals. SH will be used in the first experiment and will be measured in J/(gC). When finding SH, the change in temperature (C) and mass (g) of the metal will be used. The coefficient of LTE will be used in the second experiment and will be measured in 1/C. Using LTE, the original length of the metal (cm), the change in length (cm) from the heated to cooled metal, and change in temperature of the metal (C) will be used.

Costanzo Liu 9 Specific Heat Experimental Design Materials (2) Unknown Metal Rod (2) Molybdenum, Mo, Rod Scout Pro Electronic Scale (0.1 g precision) TI-Nspire CX Random Integer Function and Stopwatch Function Thermometer (0.1C) Procedure 1. 2. 3. Set up calorimeter (See Appendix for construction). Set up LabQuest (See Appendix for set up). Name the two Molybdenum rods Rod A and Rod B. Use the calculators random integer function to randomize the order of the 15 trials of the rods (See Appendix), seven trials for Rod A and eight for Rod B. Record which rod was chosen for each trial. Name the two unknown rods Rod C and Rod D. Randomize the order of the 15 trials for the rods, seven trials for Rod C and eight for Rod D. Record which rod was chosen for each trial. Fill the loaf pan with tap water and place on the hot plate until the temperature reaches 100C. Use the thermometer to measure the temperature. Do not let the thermometer touch the pan, only the water, and leave it in there for about five seconds. Use the scale to mass the metal rod randomly chosen for the first trial and record the value in grams. Place the metal rod inside the pan for about three minutes. Record the temperature of the water in Celsius and this will replace the temperature of the rod. Fill the calorimeter with tap water and record the temperature of the water. Start the LabQuest. Using the tongs, carefully transfer the 100C metal rod from the loaf pan into the calorimeter with room temperature water. Temperature Probe (0.1C) Logger Pro Hot Plate Calorimeter Metal Loaf Pan (8.4 in x 4.4 in x 2.5 in) 100 mL Graduated Cylinder Tongs

4.

5.

6.

7.

8. 9. 10.

Costanzo Liu 10 11. With the temperature probe, stir the calorimeter with the metal rod inside until it reaches equilibrium and record the final temperature. Repeat steps five through 11 for the rest of the 15 trials of the Molybdenum rods. Repeat for the 15 trials of the unknown rods. The same boiling water is used for all the trials. When the water levels decrease enough that there is not enough water to submerge the metal rod, add more water to the loaf pan.

12.

13.

Diagram

1
2 3 4 7 8 6 5

1: Calorimeter 2: Temperature Probes 3: Loaf Pan 4: Hot Plate 5: Scale 6: Thermometer 7: Graduated Cylinder 8: Tongs 9: Gloves 10: Logger Pro 11: Calculator

10 9 Figure 2. Materials for Specific Heat

11

Figure 2 shows the materials used in the SH experiments. The materials numbered one and two show how the temperature probes were placed inside the calorimeters to measure the different temperatures. Rods A, B, C, and D are pictured on paper towels labeled with their letter.

Costanzo Liu 11 Linear Thermal Expansion Experimental Design Materials (2) Unknown Metal Rod (2) Molybdenum, Mo, Rod TI-Nspire CX Random Integer Function and Stopwatch Function Thermometer (0.1C) Linear Thermal Expansion Jig (0.01 mm) Procedure 1. Name the two Molybdenum rods Rod A and Rod B. Use the calculators random integer function to randomize the order of the 15 trials of the rods (See Appendix), seven trials for Rod A and eight for Rod B. Record which rod was chosen for each trial. Name the two unknown rods Rod C and Rod D. Randomize the order of the 15 trials for the rods (See Appendix). Record which rod was chosen for each trial. Fill the loaf pan with tap water and place on the hot plate until the temperature reaches 100C. Use the thermometer to measure the temperature. Do not let the thermometer touch the pan, only the water, and leave it in there for about five seconds. Use the caliper to measure the initial length of the rod. Record the value. Place the metal rod inside the pan for about three minutes. Record the temperature of the water in Celsius and this will replace the temperature of the rod. When the rod reaches the temperature of the water, using the tongs, QUICKLY transfer the rod onto the jig to measure the change in length. Mark the beginning length with a small piece of tape to help keep track. Let the rod sit in the jig for about five minutes or until the arrow stops moving, using the spray bottle filled with cold water to accelerate the contraction. Record the change in length. Remove the metal rod from the LTE jig. TESR Caliper 00530085 (0.01 mm precision) Hot Plate Metal Loaf Pan (8.4 in x 4.4 in x 2.5 in) Tongs Tape Spray Bottle

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

8.

Costanzo Liu 12

9.

Repeat steps four to eight for the rest of the 15 trials of the known rod. Then repeat for the unknown rods. The same boiling water is used for all the trials. When the water levels decrease enough that there is not enough water to submerge the metal rod, add more to the loaf pan.

10.

Diagram

Figure 3. Materials for LTE Figure 3 shows the materials used for LTE. Number one is the duct tape used to mark points on the dial. Number eight is the stopwatch used along with the calculator stopwatch.

Figure 4. LTE Jig and Caliper Use

Costanzo Liu 13

Figure 4 shows how the rods were placed on the jig to measure the change in lengths and how the initial lengths were measured with the caliper. Data and Observations Table 2 SH of the Known Metal Initial Temp. (C) Trial Rod Water Metal

Change in Final Temp (C) Temp (C) Water Metal

Mass (g) Water Metal

Specific Heat (J/g C) 0.150 0.191 0.150 0.148 0.158 0.179 0.157 0.174 0.152 0.192 0.159 0.156 0.188 0.159 0.167 0.165

B 42.8 1 23.3 98.4 24.8 1.5 -73.6 75 B 42.7 2 24.1 99.0 26.0 1.9 -73.0 75 A 42.9 3 23.6 98.4 25.1 1.5 -73.3 75 A 42.8 4 23.0 99.0 24.5 1.5 -74.5 75 B 42.7 5 22.3 98.3 23.9 1.6 -74.4 75 A 6 23.0 98.3 24.8 1.8 -73.5 75 42.8 A 7 23.0 99.1 24.6 1.6 -74.5 75 42.8 B 8 25.6 99.1 27.3 1.7 -71.8 75 42.8 A 9 20.6 99.3 22.2 1.6 -77.1 75 42.8 B 10 27.5 98.2 29.3 1.8 -68.9 75 42.8 A 11 23.5 99.0 25.1 1.6 -73.9 75 42.8 A 12 21.8 98.7 23.4 1.6 -75.3 75 42.8 B 13 26.9 99.0 28.7 1.8 -70.3 75 42.8 B 14 23.4 98.7 25.0 1.6 -73.7 75 42.8 B 15 21.9 98.2 23.6 1.7 -74.6 75 42.7 Average 23.6 98.7 25.2 1.7 -73.5 75 42.8 Table 2 above shows the SH that was calculated for the known metal, molybdenum. All SHs ranged between 0.150 and 0.192. The confirmed SH of molybdenum is about 0.250. Because of the difference between the experimenters results and the known value, this means there may have been some error in the procedure run.

Costanzo Liu 14

Table 3 Observations for SH of Known Metal

Trial 1 Rod B Date 4-18 Observations Experimenters ran two trials at a time, one of each rod. Calorimeter B is used for Rod B. Logger Pro Chem 2 was used for all the trials except trial 15. Temperature Probe CH3 is identified as B. Experimenters spilled some water from calorimeter B and refilled without measuring the water amount with the graduated cylinder. The Logger Pro data collection was changed to 130 seconds for trials after the first trial. Calorimeter A is used for Rod A. The rod was placed in calorimeter A before Rod B because experimenters could only transfer one rod at a time. Temperature Probe CH4 is identified for Rod A. The same temperature probe will be used for all trials for Rod A. Rod A is placed in calorimeter A before Rod B is placed in calorimeter B. Experimenters notice that the percent error is not very different from the previous trials. There is not a long time difference between the rods' amount of time in their calorimeters. Rod B is placed in calorimeter B only a few seconds after Rod A. The initial temperature of the water was measured for all the trials with the temperature probe placed inside the calorimeter. Experimenter One stirred calorimeter A and Experimenter Two stirred calorimeter B throughout all trials so equilibrium will be reached faster. Experimenter One would occasionally stir both calorimeters temporarily as Experimenter Two inputted values into the data tables. The experimenters replaced this trial with a new trial because they notice an abnormality with the previous trial. To find the equilibrium temperature for all trials, the experimenters looked at a point on the graph where it was relatively constant. The experiment data on the Logger Pro overwrote a previous file so the data starts on Run 3. The experimenters used aluminum foil covering for the metal pan so that the water would boil faster. The initial masses of the rods were taken from a previous experiment and put into the data table. Noticed that the specific heat result values are relatively consistent. The experimenters replaced the previous trial with a new trial. For this trial, Logger Pro Chem 9 was used. This trial was done without another trial occurring simultaneously. Calorimeter A was used for this trial. The mass of the metal rod was measured after the trial.

4-18

4-18

4-18

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

B A A B A B A A B B B

4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-23

Costanzo Liu 15

In Table 3 the observations of the molybdenums SH are shown. Throughout most of the trials there were two calorimeters used at a time. As seen in the observation for trial seven, both experimenters stirred one of the two calorimeters once a rod was put inside each. Trials nine and fifteen were redone and replaced with a new trial. Table 4 SH of the Unknown Metal Initial Temp. Final (C) Trial Rod Temp Water Metal (C) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 D C C D C C C D C D D C D D 21.8 22.1 21.2 21.5 22.5 21.5 22.2 21.9 21.3 21.4 20.9 22.0 21.8 22.1 99.2 98.7 99.5 99.5 99.6 99.4 99.3 99.6 99.4 99.4 99.5 99.3 99.4 99.3 27.8 28.4 27.3 27.9 28.8 27.6 28.1 27.5 27.1 26.9 27.5 27.8 27.9 28.2

Specific Heat (J/g C) Water Metal Water Metal Mass (g) 6.0 6.3 6.1 6.4 6.3 6.1 5.9 5.6 5.8 5.5 6.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 -71.4 -70.3 -72.2 -71.6 -70.8 -71.8 -71.2 -72.1 -72.3 -72.5 -72.0 -71.5 -71.5 -71.1 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 75.6 75.3 75.2 75.6 75.2 75.2 75.2 75.6 75.2 75.6 75.6 75.2 75.6 75.6 0.326 0.349 0.329 0.346 0.347 0.331 0.323 0.301 0.312 0.294 0.355 0.316 0.331 0.332 0.298 0.326

Change in Temp (C)

D 15 22.3 99.3 27.8 5.5 -71.5 70 75.6 Average 21.8 99.4 27.8 6.0 -71.6 70 75.4 The unknown metals specific heat was much different from the molybdenum, as shown in Table 4 above. All of the SH ranged from 0.294 to 0.355 J/gC. For each trial the water temperature and the metal temperature were taken in order to keep the data as accurate as possible.

Costanzo Liu 16

Table 5 Observations for SH of Unknown Metal

Trial 1 2 Rod D C Date 4-18 4-18 Observations Trial is redone. Rod D is massed after the trial. Probe CH4 is used for Rod D. The unknown rods displaced more water when placed in the calorimeter than the molybdenum rods and decide to put 70 mL of water in the calorimeter. Probe CH3 is used for Rod C. Experimenters decide to set data collection as 150 seconds for this trial and future trials. Each of the two experimenters stirred a calorimeter. Logger Pro Chem 2 is to be used for all trials. Results are relatively consistent. Experimenters suspect that the unknown metal rods are not molybdenum. Trial is redone. The resulting specific heat is now closer to the other trials' results. Experimenters use the temperature probe to measure initial temperature for all trials. Rod C is placed in calorimeter A a few seconds before experimenters are able to place Rod D in calorimeter D for all trials. Experimenter One decides the data points to input while Experimenter Two inputted the values into the data table. The metal rods are massed before the trials begin. While transferring the rod to the calorimeter, the experimenter touched the temperature probe to the heated rod for a few seconds, which may have caused a small spike in temperature in the Logger Pro data. The experimenters realize that Rod C and D magnetized to the metal pan, unlike Rod A and B. Water in the loaf pan is constantly close to 99C. The average specific heat for the unknown rods is 0.326 J per gram Celsius. The average percent error for the unknown rods is 30.368%. Experimenters note that the percent error is different from the known.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

C D C C C D C

4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18 4-18

10 11 12

D D C

4-18 4-18 4-18

13 14 15

D D D

4-18 4-18 4-18

Costanzo Liu 17

Attention is brought to trials two and ten in Table 5. In trial two the amount of water for the calorimeter was changed because of the size of the rods. Trial ten tells of how the experimenters split up the work which made trials move along faster and more accurate when each knew how to do that job. The experimenters suspect that the metal is not molybdenum. Trials one and seven were redone. Table 6 LTE of Known Metal
Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Average Rod B B B A A B A A B B A B A B A L (mm) 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 Initial Length (mm) 129.40 129.34 129.34 129.30 129.30 129.31 129.30 129.30 129.30 129.30 129.30 129.30 129.40 129.40 129.40 129.33 Initial Temp (C) 97.0 99.2 99.7 97.0 99.2 99.5 98.1 98.2 98.6 98.2 98.6 98.2 98.2 97.9 98.2 98.4 Final Temp (C) 23.7 24.8 24.2 23.7 24.8 24.6 25.0 24.6 23.2 24.2 23.2 25.1 24.2 25.3 25.1 24.4 Alpha Coefficient (1/C x 10E-6) 6.326 2.078 3.072 3.165 3.119 2.065 2.116 2.102 2.051 2.090 2.051 2.116 3.133 2.129 2.114 2.649

The coefficient of LTE for the known metal was calculated in Table 6 above. Most of the changes in lengths were between 0.02 and 0.06 mm. This is

Costanzo Liu 18

close to the known alpha coefficient of molybdenum with exceptions of some procedural errors. Table 7 Observations for LTE of Known Metal
Trial Rod Date Observations For most of the trials, Rod A and B will be experimented on simultaneously. Jig 5 is for Rod B. Aluminum foil cover was used to heat the water faster. Because this is the first trial the experimenters did, this may be the reason why there is such a different thermal expansion value compared to the others. Trial was redone. For this trial, Jig 3 is used for Rod B. The calculator stopwatch function is used to keep the metal in the pan for only three minutes. The rod was placed on the jig for three minutes. Trial was redone. For this trial, Jig 3 was used for Rod B. Placed on the jig for three minutes. This trial was done without Rod A being experimented on simultaneously. Jig X was used for Rod A. Experimenters place the metal in the jig for 4 minutes. Trial was redone. For this trial, Jig 1 is used for Rod A. Placed on the jig for three minutes. Trial was redone. For this trial, Jig 3 was used for Rod B. The rod was placed on the jig for three minutes. Rod A was not experimented on simultaneously. Experimenters started the stopwatch late. The spray was not used as soon as the metal rod was put on the jig. Experimenters spray more than once, almost every minute. Metal rod is on jig for three minutes. In the room, the window was opened and the room temperature dropped for this trial and following trials. Experimenters notice that there is a pool of water on the jigs from spraying the rods and carefully use paper towel to wipe off some of the fluid. Noted that the percent errors are mostly consistent. Water levels in the loaf pan are low and experimenters added water. The spray bottle was refilled. Experimenters forget to start the stopwatch and measured the change in length after they were sure the dial had stopped moving. Room temperature is measured with a thermometer in the air. The initial length measurements are taken from a previous experiment with the molybdenum rods. Trial was run at the same time as trial 12. The change in length was measured when the dial stopped moving.

4-17

4-23

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

B A A B A A B B A B A B A

4-23 4-17 4-23 4-23 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-17

Costanzo Liu 19

Trials one, three, and twelve need to be pointed out in the Table 7. Trial one was the first trial done so the procedure still had some flaws that were later revised by the experimenters. In trial three the time was changed from four to three minutes because the dial stopped moving and the metal was cooled. In trial twelve, the timer was not started on time so the experimenters had to guess when the metal reached the final length. Trials two, three, five, and six were redone.

Costanzo Liu 20

Table 8 LTE of Unknown Metal Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Rod D C D D D D C D C C D C C D C

L (mm) 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.09 Initial Length (mm) 136.50 135.55 135.65 135.35 136.40 136.24 135.55 136.39 134.33 136.64 136.30 135.51 135.43 136.53 134.44 Initial Temp (C) 98.9 98.9 99.1 98.7 98.8 99.1 98.1 99.0 98.7 99.1 98.4 99.1 99.0 98.2 98.4 Final Alpha Coefficient Temp (C) (1/C x 10E-6) 23.5 23.5 20.3 25.2 24.8 21.6 24.6 22.6 25.2 20.3 23.1 21.6 22.6 20.9 23.1 8.745E-06 6.849E-06 8.420E-06 9.047E-06 8.917E-06 8.524E-06 7.026E-06 7.677E-06 9.116E-06 8.359E-06 8.769E-06 9.522E-06 8.698E-06 6.633E-06 8.890E-06

0.09 135.79 98.8 Average 22.9 8.346E-06 The unknown metal LTE is shown above. All of the change in lengths

were much higher than the known molybdenum, indicating that the unknown metal may not be molybdenum.

Costanzo Liu 21

Table 9 Observations for LTE of Unknown Metal

Trial Rod Date Observations Jigs were pulled out a small amount for rods to fit. Most trials are carried out with another trial of the other rod type. This trial was done with trial two. Jig 5 will be for Rod D. Experimenters forget to measure the initial length of the metal rods and use trial three's initial length for this trial. Jig X will be rod C. Experimenters forget to measure the initial length of the metal rods and use the trial seven's initial length for this trial. Trial is replaced with new trial along with trial ten. Initial length was measured after the trial was done. A long period of time passed before measuring to let it reach the initial length. Jig 2 is used for Rod D. Placed on jig for five minutes. Flushed with cold water in sink after to measure the initial length. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. Experimenters use the spray filled with cool water to accelerate the length change of the metal rods on the jigs for all trials. Metals were sprayed several times over the five minutes on the jig. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. Caliper 8 is used for all trials. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. The window was opened to let cool air in during this trial done simultaneously with trial 12. The window was not closed for the following trials. Jig X will be rod C. Each tick mark of the dial represents 0.01 mm for all the trials. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. Experimenters notice that the metal rods change over a longer period of time than the molybdenum rods. Jig X will be rod C. Calculator stopwatch function used to make sure that the rods are only on the jigs for five minutes for all trials. Trial is replaced with new trial. Initial length was measured after the trial was done. Experimenters waited a long period of time before measuring to make sure it reached the initial length. Jig 6 is used for Rod C. Placed on jig for five minutes. Flushed with cold water in sink after to measure the initial length. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. Room temperature measured with a thermometer held in air. The window was opened to let cool air in. Jig X will be rod C. Jig X will be rod C. Experimenters use a research binder and folder to fan the rods to accelerate the length change for all trials. Jig 5 is used for Rod D. Jig X will be rod C.

4-19

4-19

4-24

4-19

5 6 7 8 9

D D C D C

4-19 4-19 4-19 4-19 4-19

10

4-24

11 12 13 14 15

D C C D C

4-19 4-19 4-19 4-19 4-19

Costanzo Liu 22

When observing the LTE of the unknown metal, there were several things that were worth pointing out from Table 9. For trial ten the experimenters forgot to measure the initial length of the rod and had to wait until the metal was cool to measure it with the caliper. In trial one it was noted that the jigs were too small for the metals so the dials were pulled out slightly to allow the metal to fit and were used like that for the rest of the trials using those jigs. Different jigs for trials three and ten that were redone were also too short and were pulled out slightly. Data Analysis and Interpretation The quantifiable data of SH and LTE was collected through experimentation. During experimentation, the percent error was calculated for the trials and with this, the experimenters were able to see if the trials were conducted with consistency and if there were any faults with their procedures. The order of the trials were randomly chosen and the sample populations were two, independent populations. However, there were 15 trials conducted for each experiment for the different types of rods and this does not fulfill the requirement of 30 samples. To check the validity of the test results, normal probability plots and boxplots of the data will graphed to see if the data points are normally distributed and if the results of the two sample t test are conclusive.

Costanzo Liu 23

Table 10 SH Percent Error of Known Rods Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Average Rod B B A A B A A B A B A A B B B Specific Heat (J/g C) 0.149 0.191 0.150 0.148 0.158 0.180 0.157 0.174 0.152 0.192 0.159 0.156 0.188 0.159 0.167 0.165 Percent Error (%) -40.230 -23.490 -40.125 -40.952 -36.783 -28.179 -37.016 -30.563 -39.140 -23.383 -36.504 -37.685 -24.909 -36.332 -33.012 -33.887

Table 10 shows the 15 trials of the SH and percent error of the molybdenum metal. There were seven trials of rod A and eight trials of rod B. All of the percent errors were calculated using the true value of molybdenums specific heat, which is 0.250 J/gC. The percent errors were all between -23.383% and -40.950%. The average percent error was found to be about -33.887%. It is known that this metal is molybdenum, so the higher percent error is due to the experimenters procedure. Since all of the trials were about around the same percent error, the experimenters can also conclude that the trials were all performed in a similar manner.

Costanzo Liu 24

Table 11 SH Percent Error of Unknown Rods Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Rod D C C D C C C D C D D C D D Specific Heat (J/g C) 0.326 0.349 0.329 0.346 0.347 0.331 0.323 0.301 0.312 0.294 0.355 0.316 0.331 0.332 Percent Error (%) 30.221 39.425 31.621 38.514 38.624 32.354 29.093 20.360 24.975 17.558 42.049 26.373 32.206 32.950

14 D 0.298 19.202 15 Average 0.326 30.368 Table 11 above shows the specific heats and the percent errors for the unknown metal rods. There were seven trials of rod C and eight trials of rod D. All of the percent errors for the unknown metal are positive and the known metals were all negative. The percent errors range from 17.558% to 42.049%. The average percent error is 30.368%. The known percent was negative, showing a bigger difference. The large difference in percent error strongly suggests that the unknown metal is not molybdenum.

Costanzo Liu 25

Figure 5. SH Normal Probability Plots In Figure 5 the normal probability plots are shown. The unknown is on the left and the known is on the right. Most of the points are close to the line and form an almost linear model. This means that the data is normally distributed and the results of the SH analytical test can be trusted. In the known graph there were some points that were leading away from the line. This implies there may be some experimental difference between the trials.

Figure 6. SH Box Plots The boxplots of the SH are shown in Figure 6. They are obviously far apart when put on the same axis. Both distributions are also mostly normal with

Costanzo Liu 26

some skewing to the left from the known metal SH distribution, but there are no outliers from the data. This further proves that the test results for SH can be trusted because of the normal distributions. The median of the known metal data is 0.159 (J/gC) and the median of the unknown metal data 0.329 (J/gC) data. A two sample t test was conducted for both the SH and the LTE. The null hypothesis is that the mean of the known metals data will be the same as the unknown metal rods data, suggesting that the metals are the same. The alternate hypothesis states that the means of the known metals data will not be the same as the unknown metals data, suggesting that the metal rods are not the same. Ho: 1 = 2 Ha: 1 2

Figure 7. Specific Heat Two Sample t Test Results Figure 7 shows the two-sample t-test used to find the p-value of the SH (Appendix E). The p-value was calculated and was much less than the alpha level 0.1. This means that there is a very high chance that the unknown metal is

Costanzo Liu 27

not equal to the molybdenum. The alternate hypothesis was that the two specific heats would not be equal.

Figure 8. t Distribution with P-Value Figure 8 shows the p-value of the specific heat on a bell curve. On the curve t is equal to -25.2666. The p-value is so small it is not visible on the curve and is much smaller than the alpha level of 0.1. There is much less than a 1% chance that the experimenters got results as extreme as they were by chance alone when the null hypothesis is true.

Costanzo Liu 28

Table 12 LTE Percent Error of Known Rod Alpha Trial Rod Coefficient (1/C x 10-6) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 B B B A A B A A B B A B A B A 6.326 2.078 3.072 3.165 3.119 2.065 2.116 2.102 2.051 2.090 2.051 2.116 3.133 2.129 2.114

Percent Error (%) 31.787 -56.700 -35.997 -34.056 -35.031 -56.980 -55.917 -56.216 -57.262 -56.453 -57.262 -55.917 -34.730 -55.648 -55.951

Average 2.649 -44.822 In Table 12 it shows the alpha coefficient of LTE and the percent errors for the known rods. The average alpha coefficient was 2.649 x 10-6 (1/C). The true value of molybdenums LTE is 4.8 x 10-6 (1/C). The experimenters believe this was so far off because of the first trial being much higher than the rest of the trials. The average percent error was about -44.822%, but because most of the other percent errors were similar, it can be assumed that the procedure was pretty accurate and the results of the two sample t test are reliable. The negative number means that the calculated was below the true value.

Costanzo Liu 29

Table 13 LTE Percent Error of Unknown Rods Alpha Percent Trial Rod Coefficient Error (1/C) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 D C D D D D C D C C D C C D C 8.745 6.849 8.420 9.047 8.917 8.524 7.026 7.677 9.116 8.359 8.769 9.522 8.698 6.633 8.890 82.179 42.688 75.410 88.476 85.761 77.580 46.376 59.946 89.907 74.139 82.688 98.374 81.215 38.181 85.216

Average 8.346 73.876 Table 13 above shows the alpha coefficients of LTE and the percent errors for the unknown metal rods. All of the unknown metal rods percent errors are much higher than the known metal rods. The average percent of the unknown was about 73.876% and the known was about -44.822%. This is a very strong suggestion that the metals are not the same.

Costanzo Liu 30

Figure 9. Linear Thermal Expansion Normal Probability Plots In Figure 9 above the probability plot of the LTE is shown. The known is on the left and the unknown is on the right. The unknown plot is close to being linear, meaning it is fairly normally distributed. The known is not linear and shows abnormalities, and is therefore not normally distributed. The reliability of the statistical test is not high with this degree of abnormality in the data distribution.

Figure 10. LTE Box Plots Figure 10 shows the boxplots for LTE. It is seen that they are both skewed and the known metal data has an outlier. Combined with the normal probability plots from Figure 9, the data for the linear thermal expansion is shown not to be

Costanzo Liu 31

normally distributed. The median of the known metal data is about 2.116 x 10-6 (1/C) and the median of the unknown metal data is about 8.698 x 10-6 (1/C). The results for LTE are not conclusive and cannot be trusted.

Figure 11. LTE Two Sample t Test Results The two-sample t-test results for the LTE are shown in Figure 11. There was a p-value of 8.2392 x 10-15. This is very small and means that there is a very small chance of the unknown metal being molybdenum. The alternate hypothesis was that the metals would not be the same, as opposed to the null hypothesis that predicted the metals would match. With such a small p-value from the LTE test results, there is more evidence that the unknown metal is not molybdenum. There is much less than a 1% chance that the experimenters got results as extreme as they were by chance alone when the null hypothesis is true.

Costanzo Liu 32

Figure 12. t Distribution with P-Value In Figure 12 the p-value and t are shown in a bell shaped curve. The t value is equal to -15.468. The p-value is so small that it does not show up on the curve and much smaller than the alpha level 0.1. This means that it is much farther than four standard deviations away from when t is zero. The null hypothesis that the unknown metal would match the known was rejected by the researchers. For both SH and LTE the p-value was much less than the alpha level of 0.1. For SH the p-value was 2.4026 x 10-20 and the LTE p-value was 8.239 x 10-15. This is evidence that the metals are not the same. When the percent errors between the known and unknown metals were compared, it was clear that the metals were very different. For SH, the percent changed almost 60% from the known that was negative to the unknown that was positive. When the LTEs were compared, the average percent error went from about -49% to almost 74%. This jump is what caused the researchers to speculate that the metals were not of the same type of metal. The unknown

Costanzo Liu 33

metal data for LTE was considered non-normal and inconclusive, but with SH, the researchers were still able to reject the null hypothesis. In conclusion, the researchers rejected the null hypothesis that the metals would match. Conclusion The experimenters are presented with the question of whether the unknown metal they were given can be determined to be molybdenum using SH and LTE. The hypothesis that if the calculated margin of error for SH and LTE is within 6.7%, then the identity of the unknown metal can be identified as Mo, was accepted. However, the data results for LTE were found to be inconclusive based on the distributions, so the results should be taken with caution. The average percent error for the LTE experiments for the known is about -44.822% where the unknown average error was about 73.876%. The difference in average percent errors is more than 6.7%, suggesting the LTE values are different. When the rods were put in the boiling water for LTE, the atoms increased in speed and began expanding the length of the metal (Oliver). The Mo atoms did not move as rapidly as the unknown and there was a smaller increase in length. Less heat was able to enter the known because the Mo rods were smaller than the unknown. For the known Mo rods, the average percent error of the SH experiments was about -33.887% and the unknown average was 30.368%. The difference in average percent errors of the known and the unknown is more than 6.7% indicating SH difference. The Mo was not able to

Costanzo Liu 34

exothermically release heat to the water as much as the unknown. Compared to the unknown, there was less heat to release. The p-values for SH and LTE were found to be very low values. This means that the experimenters got the values they obtained by chance alone, assuming the metals were the same, were extremely low. From this, the experimenters can further conclude that the unknown metal and the known metal are not the same. During the experiments for the known rods SH, the percent errors were on average about -33.887%. This is an indication that the experimental designs contained flaws and may have been a cause for such a high percent error for a metal already confirmed to be Mo. The same holds for LTE, with an average of -44.822% error for the known. The LTE data was not normally distributed, which led to the experimenters concluding that the results are inconclusive. This can be caused by mistakes during data collection or taking measurements on instruments such as the thermal expansion jig. The jig is a sensitive mechanism that can change its output if it is even slightly interfered with. The change in temperature of the water may have been altered because some of the heat could have been absorbed by the calorimeters during the SH trials. There was also an assumption made by the researchers that the metal, when placed in boiling water for a period of time, was the same temperature as the water. This may not be completely accurate. For some of the trials, the experimenters forgot to start the timer and had to estimate when to record the change in length when the dials stopped moving on LTE.

Costanzo Liu 35

Some trials had more time to change in length than others and, by result, had a larger difference in change in length compared to the other trials. The experimenters occasionally forgot to measure the initial lengths of the unknown and had to wait until after the trial to measure them. Although the researchers waited a long period of time until measuring, the rods may not have reached the initial length by the time the experimenters measured them. If the experiment could be changed, the room should be kept at a constant temperature. The procedures need to be carried out more carefully with the timing more accurate and the properties of the rods measured in order. Research that could be conducted to further support the researchers conclusions could be to find the unique, intensive density of the metals. The researchers could reconduct the LTE experiments with longer rod samples, maybe making it easier to see the change in length. Knowing the SH and LTE can be useful to builders to decide which metal is best to use for their projects. For example, bridge constructors need to know how the metal behaves in different temperatures. SH tells you how the metal will heat in different temperatures and LTE will tell you how much the metal expands in high temperatures. Bridge constructors cannot pick a metal that will heat quickly or expands too much in heat.

Costanzo Liu 36

Acknowledgements The researchers would like to thank several people for help with finishing this research process. The first people to thank are Mrs. Jamie Hilliard, Mrs. Christine Dewey, and Mr. Mark Supal for their help in teaching and guiding the sophomores through the research process. Last to thank are the parents for supporting and helping with what they could in this tiring endeavor.

Costanzo Liu 37

Appendix A: Ti-Nspire Trial Randomization There are 60 trials in total and each trial needs its order randomized. This was done with a Ti-Nspire calculator, with the random integer function. Materials Ti-Nspire Random Integer Function Procedures 1. 2. 3. 4. Open a calculator page. Press the menu button and select option 5: Probability. Select the option 4. Random and then 2. Integer. There are 7 trials for molybdenum Rod A and 8 of Rod B. Type 1,15,7 into the parenthesizes. The numbers that appear are the trials that Rod A is used. If one is repeated, repeat steps 2 to 4 until a trial number appears that has not appeared before and that is a trial for Rod A. Repeat steps two to five, but replace step fours numbers with 1,15,8 and record as Rod B. Repeat steps two through five for Rod C. Repeat step six for Rod D.

5.

6.

7. 8.

Costanzo Liu 38

Appendix B: LabQuest The LabQuest is used for the specific heat experiments and is able to document the change in temperatures of the water when the heated rod is placed inside. Materials LabQuest Temperature Probe Procedures 1. 2. Connect the temperature probe to the LabQuest. Press the power button to turn on the LabQuest. Select New from the File menu. 3. On the Meter screen, tap Rate. Change the data collection rate to 0.5 samples per second. Change the data collection length to what is necessary for each experiment. For Rod A and B, set the length to 130 seconds. For Rod C and D, set the length to 150 seconds. Gather the initial temperature of the water in the calorimeters with the temperature probe placed inside the calorimeter. Use the data collected with the LabQuest to find the equilibrium temperature and the change in temperature when the metal is transferred.

4.

5.

6.

Costanzo Liu 39

Appendix C: Calorimeter Set Up The specific heat experiment requires the use of calorimeters, or isolated systems. Appendix A documents how to set up a calorimeter. Materials (3) 7 inch by inch PVC Pipe Primer PVC Cement Glue Drill Press inch Drill Bit

(3) PVC Plumbing Foam (6) inch PVC Sch 40 Adaptor (6) inch PVC Caps Procedure 1.

Take 3 PVC caps and drill a hole. A temperature probe must be able to fit through and have enough space to stir. Having a sample temperature probe would be helpful to make sure the measurements are correct. Beware of the fumes of the primer and cement glue. Dizziness and health effects can occur. Apply primer quickly and evenly to the inside of one PVC adaptor and the outside surface of one end of the PVC pipe. Let dry for about ten seconds. Apply the PVC cement glue evenly to the same areas primer was placed and quickly attach the adaptor to the PVC pipe end. Twist to distribute the solvents and make sure that they are tightly attached. Hold the parts together for about 15 seconds until the cement holds. Do steps 2-4 for the other end of the same PVC pipe and for every other PVC pipe end. Assign one drilled cap and one undrilled to each PVC pipe. Apply primer to the inside of the undrilled cap and the part of the adaptor that will be attached to the cap. Let dry for about ten seconds. Apply cement glue to the same areas and then quickly twist them together and hold for about 15 seconds.

2.

3.

4. 5.

6. 7.

8.

Costanzo Liu 40

9.

Redo steps 7 and 8 for one end of the rest of the PVC pipes with the drilled caps.

Figure 13. Calorimeter Set-Up Figure 13 shows the set-up of the calorimeter used in the procedures for SH. The hole is where the temperature probe would be inserted.

Costanzo Liu 41

Appendix D: Specific Heat Calculation Specific heat can be calculated if the mass and temperatures of both the water and the metal are known. Appendix D provides a sample calculation of how to find the specific heat. ( ( ) )

Figure 14. Specific Heat Calculation Figure 14 shows the equation used to find the specific heat (J/gC) of a metal and a sample calculation. It is the same as the absolute value of wate rs specific heat multiplied by the mass of the water (g) times waters change in temperature (C) divided by the product of the metals mass and change in temperature. Specific heat is represented by the variable s; mass is symbolized with m and temperature is T. Figure 14 demonstrates the calculation of the first trial of the specific heat experiment of the known molybdenum rods. The specific heat value was calculated to about 0.149 (J/gC).

Costanzo Liu 42

Appendix E: Percent Error Calculation The true values of molybdenums intensive properties are known. The experimental value the researchers collect can be compared to the known and they can analyze how different the two values are.

Figure 15. Percent Error Calculation Figure 15 shows the equation to calculate the percent error of a trial. The sample calculation shows the percent error calculation of trial one from the specific heat experiment of the known molybdenum rods. The 0.149 value is the experimental value and 0.25 is the known specific heat value of molybdenum. From the equation, the percent error of the experimental value compared to the true value of molybdenum is -40.4%. Note that in the percent error tables (Refer to Table 10) the percent error for the first trial is about -40.230%, which is not the same as the percent error calculated above as -40.4%. The tables, including the specific heat column, are formatted to show only three values after the decimal and show the rounded numbers, but the percent error column of the table calculated the longer specific heat value that was not rounded.

Costanzo Liu 43

Appendix F: Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion Calculation The coefficient of linear thermal expansion, alpha, can be calculated knowing the lengths and the temperatures of the rods. Appendix F provides a sample calculation to find one value of alpha.

| | |

Figure 16. Alpha Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion Calculation Figure 16 shows the equation to calculate the coefficient of linear thermal expansion. Alpha is equal to the absolute value of the change in length ( L) divided by the initial length (Li) multiplied by the change in temperature (T). Length is measured in millimeters and temperature in Celsius. The first trial of the known molybdenum rods from the linear thermal expansion experiment was used in the figure for the sample calculation. The 0.06 mm is the change in length, the 129.4 mm is the initial length measurement and the -73.3C is the change in temperature. Alpha is calculated as 6.326 x 10-6 (1/C).

Costanzo Liu 44

Appendix G: Two Sample t Test and p-value The experimenters use two sample t tests to analyze the result collected. Through this, they can find the p-value, or the chance that they got the results they did assuming that the metals are the same by chance alone.

Figure 17. Specific Heat Two Sample t Test Calculation Figure 17 shows how the t test equations for specific heat and linear thermal expansion. The variables with a subscript of one are the known metal rods values and the variables with a subscript of two are the unknown rods values. The sample calculation shows the test for specific heat. The variable represents the mean of the known metal rods specific heat, the variable standard deviation of the known rods specific heat, and symbolizes the is the

number of trials of the known rods. The variable represents the mean of the unknown metal rods specific heat, the variable unknown rods specific heat, and is the standard deviation of the

symbolizes the number of trials of the

unknown rods. The t value is about -25.2666. The corresponding p value is found to be 2.4026 x 10-20.

Costanzo Liu 45

Work Cited "223 Physics Lab: Linear Thermal Expansion." Clemson.edu. Ed. Jerry Hester. Clemson University, 27 Jan. 2006. Web. 27 Mar. 2013. <http://www.clemson.edu/ces/phoenix/labs/223/expansion/>. Chang, Raymond. "Thermochemistry." Chemistry. 9th ed. New York: McGrawHill Companies, 2007. 224-44. Print. Chapter 2 Thermal Expansion. Owlnet.rice.edu. ASM International, n.d. PDF File. 28 Mar. 2013. <http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~msci301/ ThermalExpansion.pdf>. "Coefficient of Thermal Linear Expansion." Users.stlcc.edu. St. Louis Community College, n.d. PDF. 15 May 2013. <http://users.stlcc.edu/cburkhardt/sum/ lab/thermal.pdf>. "Coefficients of Linear Thermal Expansion." EngineeringToolBox.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2013. <http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/linearexpansion-coefficients-d_95.html>. Donahue, Linda. "Functions of Molybdenum." EHow. Demand Media, 10 Feb. 2010. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://www.ehow.com/list_5978778_functionsmolybdenum.html>. "Experiment #2, the Specific Heat of Aluminum." Physicslabs.umb.edu. University of Massachusetts, n.d. PDF File. <http://www.physicslabs.umb. edu/Physics/sum07/Exp2_182_Sum07.pdf>.

Costanzo Liu 46

"Experiment 10 Specific Heat and Heat of Fusion." Department of Physics and Astronomy at Georgia State University, n.d. PDF File. 25 Mar. 2013. <http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/butler/labs/physics1111/10 SpecificHeat1111.pdf>. Gray, Theodore. "The Photographic Periodic Table of the Elements." The Photographic Periodic Table of the Elements. Wolfram Research, n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2013. <http://periodictable.com/>. Grolier Incorporated. Academic American Encyclopedia. 13th ed. Danbury, Conn.: Grolier, 1996. Print. Harrison, David M. "Thermal Expansion Experiment." Thermal Expansion Expt. Physics Laboratory at the University of Toronto, May 2003. Web. 27 Mar. 2013. <http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/IYearLab/Intros/ThermalExpans/ ThermalExpans.html>. Kenneth Barbalace. Periodic Table of Elements - Molybdenum - Mo. EnvironmentalChemistry.com. 1995 - 2013. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://EnvironmentalChemistry.com/yogi/periodic/Mo.html> Liu, Emily. A Rubber Bands Thermodynamics, Warren: 2013. Print. 16 April 2013. "Magnetic Properties of Solids." Hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu. Georgia State University, 19 Feb. 2006. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/solids/magpr.html>. "Molybdenum History." Molybdenum History. The International Molybdenum Association, n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://www.imoa.info/molybdenum/

Costanzo Liu 47

molydbenum_history.php>. "Molybdenum Properties." Imoa.info. International Molybdenum Association, n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://www.imoa.info/molybdenum/molybdenum _properties.php>. Oliver, Monica, and Steve Cranford. "Thermal Expansion." Web.mit.edu. Laboratory of Atomistic and Molecular Mechanics, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2013. <http://web.mit.edu/mbuehler/www/SIMS/Thermal Expansion.html>. Potts, Gretchen E. "Calorimetry." Calorimetry. Gretchen E. Potts, 3 Aug. 2010. Web. 24 Mar. 2013. < http://www.utc.edu/Faculty/GretchenPotts/chemistryhelp/calorimetry.htm> "Processing." Imoa.info. International Molybdenum Association, n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://www.imoa.info/molybdenum/mining_processing/ molybdenum_processing.php> "Temperature and Thermal Expansion." Temperature and Thermal Expansion. Ed. Sidney Redner. Physics Department at Boston University, Nov. 1999. Web. 27 March 2013. <http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py105/ Temperature.html> Winter, Mark. "Molybdenum." WebElements Periodic Table of the Elements. The University of Sheffield and WebElements Ltd, UK, 1993. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. <http://www.webelements.com/molybdenum/atoms.html>.