What would you expect to observe when Br2 reacts with 2-butyne?

I expect to observe a change in colour from reddish brown to a colourless solution

Explanation:

Bromine (Br2) attacks the electron rich carbon-carbon triple bond in but-2-yne, an alkyne to form an initial product 2, 3 dibromobut-2-ene; which reacts with excess bromine to form a final product 2,2,3,3 -tetrabromobutane.

The reaction occurs in two steps. On approaching but-2-yne, bromine molecule becomes polarised forming an induced dipole containing a bromonium ion.

Br - Br → Br+ - Br-

The bromonium ion (Br+) formed then attacks the carbon - carbon triple bond to form the initial product

2,3- dibromobut-2-ene

CH2-C≡C-CH2 + Br+ →

CH2 - CBr =CBr-CH2

(2,3- dibromobut-2-ene)

Which in the presence of excess bromine gives the final product

2,2,3,3 - tetrabromobutane.

CH2 - CBr =CBr-CH2 + Br2 →

CH3 -CBr2-CBr2 - CH3

2,2,3,3 - tetrabromobutane.

A visible change in colour from the reddish-brown colour of Bromine to a colourless solution is observed during the reaction.

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.

practical process described pest part of scientific investigation.

because practical knowledge is powerful then therotical knowledge.