Some clarifications

[TrueTears]

if a balloon is involved....... ?

With regards to the question you met, yes the pressure could change by adding an inert gas, but this inert gas does not change the total volume of the container hence the relative concentrations stays the same, therefore a change in pressure in this case would do nothing to the concentration fraction.

Assuming it's not a balloon. If it is, then obviously the volume changes hence you would just apply Le Chatelier's principle.

[dummy]

ok,that's cool =)

[NE2000]

Explain using the particle theory for chemical reactions, photographers using IR-sensitive film store it in a refrigerator before use. I've just got a bit confused about the chemical nature of this. What are the 'reactants'. I get why higher temperatures increase the rate of reaction (so no need to bother explaining that), just in this application I would like someone to explain what goes on.

Another question which is a bit weird. The K value for a reaction (eqn given with reversible arrow) is (yes, that's a lot). Question is "is the reversible arrow justified". Automatically I was no. But then I just wanted to make sure that there isn't something more technical that I am missing. Btw, if it was then could you replace the reversible arrow with a backwards arrow?

[TrueTears]

Explain using the particle theory for chemical reactions, photographers using IR-sensitive film store it in a refrigerator before use. I've just got a bit confused about the chemical nature of this. What are the 'reactants'. I get why higher temperatures increase the rate of reaction (so no need to bother explaining that), just in this application I would like someone to explain what goes on.

Another question which is a bit weird. The K value for a reaction (eqn given with reversible arrow) is (yes, that's a lot). Question is "is the reversible arrow justified". Automatically I was no. But then I just wanted to make sure that there isn't something more technical that I am missing. Btw, if it was then could you replace the reversible arrow with a backwards arrow?

In regards to second question, the K value is very huge so this means that the forward reaction is favoured WAY more than the backwards, however if you choose to write the reversible arrows the forward reaction arrow would be A LOT LONGER than the backwards arrow. To ask is it justified? In a sense, it wouldn't be wrong to put a reversible arrow, but in this case the backwards reaction arrow would be so small it could be considered negligible.

Yes if it was then it would be the opposite, the forward reaction arrow would be very very small and the backwards reaction arrow would be very huge. So yes in a sense considering the forward reaction is negligible then you could just use a plain backwards reaction arrow.