Clarifications about acid-base theory [closed]








**Closed**. This question needs to be more [focused](/help/closed-questions). It is not currently accepting answers.
 
 






---








**Want to improve this question?** Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by [editing this post](/posts/24942/edit).




Closed 6 years ago.








[Improve this question](/posts/24942/edit) 



Considering the Arrhenius theory of acids and bases: 


1. Is every existing compound either an acid or a base?
2. Why is a compound such as $ \ce {NH\_3}$ considered a base, if it doesn't even have an oxygen atom and a base is supposed to release $ \ce {OH-}$ in water?
3. If $X$ is a base according to Arrhenius theory, will $X$ still be a base according to the other two theories (and the same if $X$ were an acid)?


According to the Brønsted-Lowry theory:


1. There are no absolute acid and bases, but only acid-base reaction in which one compound acts as a base and the other as an acid. So, is every reaction of two compounds an acid-base one?
2. Except for water, are there any other substances which in some reactions act as bases while in others as acids?




A couple of thoughts:


There are mainly 3 different definitions of acids and bases:


1. The Arrhenius formulation: Acid = proton donor in water, Based = hydroxide ion donor in water
2. The Brønsted-Lowry formulation: Acid = ***potential*** proton donor, Base = ***potential*** proton acceptor
3. The Lewis formulation: Acid = Electron pair acceptor, Base = Electron pair donor


The Lewis definition is the most general, followed by the BL and finally by the Arrhenius definition.


You are right, for example HCl is considered a strong acid in water, but it is very weakly acidic in glacial acetic acid. If you follow the Lewis definition a large number of reactions will be considered acid base reactions. An exception are free-radical based reactions


There are many compounds that are amphoteric, but it really also depends on the definition you use.


 2