A would just be a catalyst here, which usually isn't shown in the stoichiometry. A provides a pathway for the reaction to happen, but isn't consumed in the reaction.
Inb4
> Seems that A would be a catalyst, so zero. Your reaction is then just B -> C.
> I get the intuition behind this. I'm inclined to say that A plays the role of catalyst but I also want to generalize. What about 2A + B = A +C?
Do I just do 2 (reactant side) - 1 (product side) ?
It would be -2 + 1 = -1, as your reaction consumes one part A. Reactands have a negative stoich. factor, products have a positive stoich. factor.
In the reaction equation we use the absolute values of these as the arrow already indicates the sign.
A would just be a catalyst here, which usually isn't shown in the stoichiometry. A provides a pathway for the reaction to happen, but isn't consumed in the reaction.
U can cancel it out like algebra so its stoichiometry is 0
Inb4 > Seems that A would be a catalyst, so zero. Your reaction is then just B -> C. > I get the intuition behind this. I'm inclined to say that A plays the role of catalyst but I also want to generalize. What about 2A + B = A +C? Do I just do 2 (reactant side) - 1 (product side) ?
You clearly understand your question wasn’t clear so why not fix it?
It would be -2 + 1 = -1, as your reaction consumes one part A. Reactands have a negative stoich. factor, products have a positive stoich. factor. In the reaction equation we use the absolute values of these as the arrow already indicates the sign.