zinc since it is more reactive than iron
Yes. Zinc will likely replace iron because it is more reactive.
by heating it with a more reactive element; e.g. zinc.
No, Florine is the most reactive element that is why it cannot exist in its original state and it is never never available in its original state Electonic cofiriguration:2,8,18,32,18,8,1. for more details contact me at deviprsd21@gmail.com
Zinc is more reactant than Iran because it is able to lose it's electrons alot easier. bascically if there was a fight between the two of them then the zinc would win because it is more reactant.
Zinc is more reactive than mercury.
Actually zinc is more reactive than copper.
magnesium is an alkaline earth metal. silver, copper, lead, zinc, and iron are transition metals. alkaline earths are naturally more reactive then transition metals.
non-reactive
No, there would be no reaction present. This is because the particles are more reactive in the zinc then they are in the iron, thus creating no displacement reaction to occur between the metals.
Sacrificial protection is basically attaching a piece of metal that is more reactive that iron to the object made of iron. This more reactive metal, commonly magnesium or zinc, will corrode in the place of iron. That is, the more reactive metal will feed the iron with electrons each time the iron is oxidised to form iron ions, thus reverting it to iron once again instead of letting it become iron hydroxide (rust). Thus, the more reactive metal is sacrificed for the iron.
Sacrificial protection is only effective if the metal used for sacrificial protection is more reactive than Iron in the reactivity series. Since gold is one of the least reactive metals in the reactivity series, it would not get oxidized in the place of Iron. A more reactive metal than Iron, e.g. Zinc, is used as the Zinc metal would oxidize in the place of iron, thus preventing Iron from rusting.