1. 30/30 points Last Response | Show Details All Responses Notes Data Table A. Absorbances of Standard Cu2+ SolutionsStandard Cu2+ Solutions Absorbance at 600 nm1: 5.0 x 10-4 Cu(NO3)2.029 [0.029]2: 1.0 x 10-3 Cu(NO3)2.139 [0.139]3: 5.0 x 10-3 Cu(NO3)2.325 [0.325]4: 1.0 x 10-2 Cu(NO3)2.479 [0.479]Equation of Trendliney = 44. [44]x+ .066 [0.066] R2 = .95[0.95]Data Table B. Absorbances of Solutions Saturated with Cu(IO3)2Cu(IO3)2 SaturatedSolutionsAbsorbance at 600nm[Cu2+] [IO31-]A: 1.0 x 10-2 M KIO3.111 [0.111]1.0e-3[0.0010] M.012 [0.012]MB: 5.0 x 10-3 M KIO3.087 [0.087]4.8e-4[0.00048] M.0060 [0.0060] MC: Deionized Water.126 [0.126]1.4e-3[0.0014] M.0028 [0.0027] MD: 1.0 x 10-3 MCu(NO3)2.149 [0.149]1.9e-3[0.0019] M.0018 [0.0018] ME: 5.0 x 10-3 MCu(NO3)2.247 [0.247]4.1e-3[0.0041] M-.0018 [-0.0018] MData Table C. Calculated Ksp and Solubilities of Cu(IO3)2Cu(IO3)2 Saturated Solutions Calculated KspCalculated SolubilityA: 1.0 x 10-2 M KIO31.4e-7 [1.4e-07] 1.0e-3 [0.0010] MB: 5.0 x 10-3 M KIO31.7e-8 [1.7e-08] 4.8e-4 [0.00048] MC: Deionized Water1.0e-8 [1.0e-08] 1.4e-3 [0.0014] MD: 1.0 x 10-3 M Cu(NO3)26.2e-9 [6.2e-09] .00090 [0.00090] ME: 5.0 x 10-3 M Cu(NO3)21.3e-8 [1.3e-08] -.00090 [-0.00090] MAverage3.7e-8 [3.7e-08]------------Question 4b. The literature value for the Ksp of Cu(IO3)2 is 6.85 x 10-8. How does this compare you your experimental results and your average? What is the percent difference compared to your average?% Difference = ((Experimental - Theoretical)*100)/Theoretical% Difference = -46 [-46] %Question 6a. Looking at your solubility results for solution A as compared to C, did the solubility increase, decrease or stay the same in the solutions that originally contained IO31- ions? (_) (_) solubility increased (o) (o) solubility decreased (_) (_) solubility was about the same Question 6b. Does this confirm the common ion effect? (o) (o) yes (_) (_) no (_) (_) cannot tell Questio 6c. Looking at your solubility results for solution B as compared to C, did the solubility increase, decrease or stay the same in the solutionsthat originally contained IO31- ions? (_) (_) solubility increased (o) (o) solubility decreased (_) (_) solubility was about the same Question 6d. Does this confirm the common ion effect? (o) (o) yes (_) (_) no (_) (_) cannot tell Question 7a. Looking at your solubility results for solution D as compared to C, did the solubility increase, decrease or stay the same in the solutionsthat originally contained Cu2+ ions? (_) (_) solubility increased (o) (o) solubility decreased (_) (_) solubility was about the same Question 7b. Does this confirm the common ion effect? (o) (o) yes(_) (_) no (_) (_) cannot tell Question 7c. Looking at your solubility results for solution E as compared to C, did the solubility increase, decrease or stay the same in the solutionsthat originally contained Cu2+ ions? (_) (_) solubility increased (o) (o) solubility decreased (_) (_) solubility was about the same Question 7d. Does this confirm the common ion effect? (o) (o) yes (_) (_) no (_) (_) cannot tell 2. 5/5 points Last Response | Show Details All Responses Notes Type the title of your graph in the answer box. Your instructor will enter the score for your graph in the score box for this question. Make sure you turn in a copy of your graph before leaving lab! Absorbances of Standard Cu2+ SolutionsKey: Enter the score for this student's graph here if lower than full credit. Check for title, labels, trendline and equation.3. --/15 points No Response | Show Details Notes Type your name in the answer box. Your instructor will enter your discretionary lab grade in the score box for this question. (No Response)Key: Enter a discretionary score for this student, if lower than full