[hitto]

Can someone give me some tips about balancing the equation?:)

[Capuchin]

You just have to make sure there's the same number of each element on both sides of the equation.

[Capuchin]

It's all 6s and 12s. You can do it! :)

Happy to check your answer if you come up with one.

[Capuchin]

Although that seems to be right, the generally accepted equation is:



Maybe take both and ask your teacher why they differ.
I'm sure the extra water must have some other role.

[follinverno]

When you have the same molecule or atoms in both sides, you can cut the same number manteining the mass balance and the charge balance.
In your case you can cut the 6 water from one side and reduce to 6 the other side... am I clear?

[Capuchin]

Yes I understand that, but this isn't a chemical reaction, it's a biological mechanism, extra molecules may have extra function.

[follinverno]

You are right from the point of view that sometime it is true that you must keep more molecules than "necessary" for other reasons...
But stoichiometrically, on the paper, nobody can say that the correction I gave is wrong if mass balances and charges as well.

There is the example of H+, H3O+
H+ do not exist alone in solution never ever and today the most common form accepted is H3O+
But formally if I keep the H+ would be chemically wrong but stoichiometrically right

It is question of interpretation (old school or new school)
It is question of aim (rightness of the chemistry or rightness of the stoichiometry)

Or at list this is what I studied.
Regards

[Capuchin]

Yes of course, But every text book out there will list the equation that I gave, does that mean that all these biologists are incapable at chemistry?

[Capuchin]

Okay, I've done some researching! The equation that I stated is the equation that is used because the waters on the left split up to form the Oxygens on the right, and the Carbon dioxides on the left split up to form the glucose and the waters on the right.

This is proven by radiolabelling. So this is why the extra waters are there, and that equation is correct, not the shorter one!

[follinverno]

In medio stat virtus.

They are not wrong... it is just interpretation...

I am afraid chemistry is not an exact science and biology is even less exact!
I hope you will agree.

[Capuchin]

I don't think I agree in this case.

The biology is more exact in this case because this is how the real physical system works in nature. The chemical simplifications that you are applying don't happen in nature!

[follinverno]

Dear Capuchin,

I think you give too much credit to biology and chemistry... they are not exact science.

... and in my book the balance is with only 6 water molecule on one side.

I am sure we could carry on and on with this, back and forth, but this is not the right place... and I am sure I am robbing humanity from your wise advices... so... bye bye.