In response to this six year-old web page on “chemical reactions”, I present my next blog. First order of business: determining real chemical reactions from fakes.

10. This is indeed a chemical reaction, because you can clearly see a gas being produced during the first second–one indicator of reactions– and because the event produces something new: sodium chloride, produced during the bonding of chlorine and sodium, which is the very definition of a reaction.

9. This is also a reaction, because the magnesium burns and that is one sign of a chemical reaction. I don’t think in the page works, so there’s one that I found.

8. Another reaction; something burns and a gas (oxygen) is produced.

7. This isn’t a reaction. There is no indicator of a chemical reaction besides the superconductor;s change in temperature, but change in temperature is found in both physical, such as melting water, and chemical changes, like burning paper, so it isn’t really an indicator at all.

6. I’m very certain this isn’t a chemical reaction, if only because the sodium acetate stays as sodium acetate and doesn’t change into anything else. It can be present as a solution or as crystals because phase changes aren’t chemical changes.

5. Hydrogels, of which I cannot find a short video to replace the one on the page that seemingly “does not exist”, do not work by chemical reactions. If that was so, paper towels soaking up water would be chemical reactions. The hydrogels remain as hydrogels and the water remains as water.

4. Sulfur hexafluoride isn’t a chemical reaction, because there isn’t even a second chemical named here. It’s just dense air, weighing in at about 137 g/mol compared to regular air’s average molar mass of 29 g/mol; about 4.7 times as dense.

3. Superfluid helium isn’t a chemical reaction, because if you remembered from up above, phase changes, such as from gas to liquid, aren’t chemical changes, no matter how awesome.

2. Obviously there wouldn’t be any smoke or fire if it wasn’t a reaction, so it must be a chemical reaction. And to clear any confusion, I’m very certain the reaction is the thermite’s component chemicals, and the thermite reacting with the liquid nitrogen. And thirdly, since that entry’s video is telling me that the video is private and therefore un-seeable, here is another video I found of the reaction.

1. This last event is a chemical reaction, though it isn’t easy to know why–especially when color changes are also present in both chemical and physical changes and therefore aren’t of any help.

Second order of business: balancing equations to applicable reactions.

10. 2Na + Cl2 –> 2NaCl; This is synthesis, and also redox.

9. 2Mg + CO2 –> 2MgO + C; This is single-replacement metathesis.

8. 6KClO3 + C6H12O6 –> 6KCl + 6H2O + 6CO2 + 3O2, supposing the reaction is between the potassium chlorate and the glucose sugar in the gummy bear. This reaction is kind of almost like combustion, maybe.

2. Thermite comes in many different combinations, so I’ll use ferric oxide and aluminum powder: Fe2O3 + 2Al –> Al2O3 + 2Fe; this is single-replacement metathesis, and is also redox.

1. The very second that I find a full list of reactants and products for one of these reactions, I’ll update this post. I don’t even know exactly what type of reaction this would be either.

Final order of business: determining my favorite one.

It would have to be the number 1 reaction, the “Briggs-Raucsher” reaction, because I can’t imagine how rare oscillating reactions like that are, because it made a whole lot of pretty colors, and because superconductivity and the magnetic properties thereof are not considered chemical reactions.