Ionization - Science topic

Hi everyone I need to know about New methods in ionizing Non volatile compounds in mass spectrometry. . If you know about this please share some papers with me.

Thank you.

I am trying to determine the electron number density in my plasma by using the Saha Equation for degree of ionization. However I am slightly confused with how to determine the particle density (n = ni + ni+1) to solve for ne. Is there a standard value or...?

I presume as a first approximation I could determine the density of the gas with the ideal gas law and then use this number to approximate the density at my determined temperature. If I do so are there any obvious complications I may be overlooking?

Thanks in advance!!!!

I am trying to run BFEE on my protein-ligand complex in a ionized water environment. I have all the NAMD files from my simulation; however, when I go to run BFEE with the files I get "the domain error: argument not in valid range". Does anyone know how to possibly fix this or has experience using VMD BFEE? I am using the restart files for .coor, .xsc, and .vel.

Below is the protein-ligand complex. I recognize that my ligand is just a small chain of amino acids.

What is dark matter? And how was the structure of the world formed?

Dark matter is still a subject of ongoing debate. It has been considered in the theoretical description of compact objects such as neutron stars with cores of very dense matter. Various candidates for dark matter have been proposed in the scientific literature. Among them, the sexaquark has been identified as a potential boson particle that can form in the neutron star material based on its mass properties. We investigate the viability of the sexquark as a candidate for dark matter, especially under certain density conditions. Addressing the challenges associated with the formation of a boson particle in a highly dense medium without compromising the stability of the neutron star. A direct linear mass change for the sexaquark in the hadronic equation of state. It was observed that including the sexaquark as a dark matter candidate in the hadronic matter equation of state, although it has a repulsive interaction with the baryonic matter, softens the equation of state. We assume that the interaction strength of dark matter with baryonic matter increases linearly with the baryon density. We observe that the increase in the effective mass of the Sexaquark as a result of the increase in its vacuum mass causes the equation of state to become stiffer compared to the constant mass state. We determine lower and upper mass limits for this bosonic dark matter based on observational limits for neutron stars in the DD2Y-T model, when a quark-matter phase-to-phase transition is used. Dark matter, neutron star, equation of state, relativistic mean field, phase transition, sexquark.

Stam Nicolis added a reply

The particle content of dark matter is, for the moment, unknown.

Sexaquarks, as the name indicates, are composite particles made of six quarks-quarks are among the constituents of ``ordinary'' matter. The reason they don't have anything to do with dark matter is that dark matter is made of other kinds of particles. If it were made of known particles, quarks or leptons, it would have had known interactions with ordinary matter, beyond just gravitational interaction (which is how its presence has been established). It doesn't, however, have strong or electromagnetic interactions with ordinary matter (whether it has, only, weak interactions is, still, a matter of study), so it doesn't carry color or electric charge.

How the ``structure of the world was formed'' is known, after the era in which gravity decoupled from the other interactions, in general terms, though many details are, still, not clear. Cf. for instance: https://workshops.ift.uam-csic.es/uploads/charla/275/Zavala_SM_LCDM.pdf

Reply to this discussion

Dark Matter

Neutron Star

Density

Gravitation

Electromagnetic Phenomena

Alessandro Rizzo added a reply

1 day ago

Hello,

Dark matter is a substance that makes up about 27% of the universe. We can't see or detect it directly, but we know it's there because of its gravitational effects on visible matter. Scientists think that dark matter played a crucial role in forming galaxies and large-scale structures in the cosmos. It acts like an invisible scaffold, helping to clump regular matter together. Well We're still not sure what dark matter is made of. Some ideas include exotic particles like WIMPs or the sexaquark you mentioned. Researchers are trying to detect dark matter particles in labs and looking for indirect signs of it in space.As for how the world's structure formed, dark matter was undoubtely the key. After the Big Bang, it helped gravity pull matter together to form the first stars and galaxies. Over time, this process built up the complex web of galaxy clusters and filaments we see today. So Dark matter remains one of the biggest puzzles in physics. We're working on understanding it better, but for now, its true nature is still a mystery.

Javad Fardaei added a reply

3 days ago

Dear Abbas these two articles might answer your questions.

Article The Mythos of Gravity Or (Newtonian and Einsteinian Gravity is a Myth)

… Read more

Abbas Kashani added a reply

Dear Javad Fardai

From the United States of America

Thank you very much for your kindness, I was very impressed with your articles. Thank you Abbas

… Read more

Alessandro Rizzo added a reply

Hello,

Dark matter is a substance that makes up about 27% of the universe. We can't see or detect it directly, but we know it's there because of its gravitational effects on visible matter. Scientists think that dark matter played a crucial role in forming galaxies and large-scale structures in the cosmos. It acts like an invisible scaffold, helping to clump regular matter together. Well We're still not sure what dark matter is made of. Some ideas include exotic particles like WIMPs or the sexaquark you mentioned. Researchers are trying to detect dark matter particles in labs and looking for indirect signs of it in space.As for how the world's structure formed, dark matter was undoubtely the key. After the Big Bang, it helped gravity pull matter together to form the first stars and galaxies. Over time, this process built up the complex web of galaxy clusters and filaments we see today. So Dark matter remains one of the biggest puzzles in physics. We're working on understanding it better, but for now, its true nature is still a mystery.

Gurcharn Singh Sandhu added a reply

July 24

DARK MATTER

It is fundamentally wrong to assume the existence of fictitious Dark Matter for explaining the pattern of circular velocities of stellar objects in galactic spiral arms.

Let a stellar object of mass m, with circular velocity Vc and radial velocity Vr, be located within a spiral arm at a radial distance R from the galactic centre. Let Mr be the total baryonic mass within a sphere of radius R. Assuming approximate validity of the shell theorem for the galactic disc region and also assuming that the stellar object under consideration is moving solely under the influence of central force field of the galaxy, radial acceleration dVr/dt of the object will be given by,

dVr/dt = -GMr/R2 + Vc2/R

While justifying the necessity of dark matter, the radial acceleration dVr/dt is assumed to be zero and all trajectories of stellar objects are implicitly assumed to be circular, which is wrong. The circular or tangential velocities of stellar bodies are not directly produced by the radial acceleration field of the galaxy but depend on the initial angular momentum of the accreting matter with respect to the gravitating body. Conservation of angular momentum will ensure increase in circular velocity of stellar bodies as their distance from central gravitating body keeps decreasing. Let L be the angular momentum of the stellar object of mass m while entering the outer fringes of the galaxy which will remain constant through out its motion within the central gravitational field. The circular velocity Vc of this object, at any distance from the center of the gravitating mass Mr, will be given by Vc = L/(m.R) and this does not depend upon mass Mr. That is, the increase in circular velocity Vc with decreasing R does not depend on the strength of central gravitation field or magnitude of Mr, but is solely governed by the conservation of angular momentum. Hence it is fundamentally wrong to assume the existence of fictitious Dark Matter for explaining the pattern of circular velocities of stellar objects in spiral arms.

There are other reasons for explaining the flatness of rotation curve but definitely not the assumption of higher mass Mr or Dark Matter. In reality stellar objects in spiral arms do not move solely under the influence of central gravitation field of the galaxy, their motion is also influenced by the local gravitation fields within the spiral arms. There are localized gravitating bodies existing within the spiral arms, which produce their own gravitation field in addition to the gravitational field of the central gravitating body.

Article Ionic Gravitation and Ionized Solid Iron Stellar Bodies

Stam Nicolis added a reply

July 25

Asking the same question multiple times doesn't make much sense. It suffices to ask it once. Dark matter doesn't have anything to do with neutron stars, it has to do with the rotation curves of galaxies.

Sexaquarks aren't singled out among hadrons for having repulsive interactions with baryonic matter, that statement is wrong. Nor does their contribution ``soften the equation of state'' of baryonic matter.

Dark matter, once more, has been found to interact with ordinary mattr, baryonic or not, only gravitationally and it's not known whether it interacts with it through the weak interaction.

The mass limit of dark matter as a function of the energy budget of the Universe is known; its particle content isn't, yet, known.

Abdul Malek added a reply

July 25

"Dark Matter" is a crude fiction arising in spite of the scientific fact that Newton's theory of (one-sided) universal gravitational attraction is patently false, because it does not take into account the reality of the (gravitation opposing) centrifugal force and vis viva of Leibniz.

A (suggested) new quantitative form of the gravitational potential taking into account of the role of the opposing forces, in the dynamics of the celestial formations, eliminate the need for fictitious Dark/black cosmic monster of Fairy Tale cosmology of official "science"!

Article THE CONCEPTUAL DEFECT OF THE LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION OR...

Moreover, the narrative of the "Big Bang" created universe, where the galaxies are supposedly formed by universal condensation of matter is false! On the contrary, new matter created by existing galaxies are ejected and/or dissipated, which then give rise to the formation of new galaxies in an infinite, eternal and ever-changing universe. Ambartsumian, Arp and the Breeding Galaxies: http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V12NO2PDF/V12N2MAL.pdf

Kanat Abildinov added a reply

19 hours ago

There isn't any dark matter, in the Universe. There is uniform acceleration of inertial motion defined by masses in the Universe.

There are four kinds of interactions in our Universe, their names: electromagnetic, strong, weak and gravitational. In the standard model electromagnetic and weak forces was combined and represented as unified electroweak force in the Grand Unification of three called interactions except for gravitational. The main problem of Physics is a building of Unified Theory of Everything, so-called Super Unification theory, or the theory of matter (field). It is now known that the classic mechanics and the quantum field theory, which is consistent with quantum mechanics and special relativity, cannot to unite four known interactions by single unified one. It was main aim in the 30 last years in the Einstein’s life. At present we have a crisis in particle physics [1] and problems in high energy astrophysics [2], such as unexplained energy and sources of ultrarelativistic charged particles (ultra-high-energy cosmic rays) [2, 3], the problems of the “dark matter” [4] and “dark energy” [4, 5] in the Universe, and the problem in the Cosmology, such as acceleration models of the Universe [4] which cannot be admitted by the philosophic principles, and by this cause cannot be understood by most of peoples. Trying to resolve some of these problems, we can consider new theory based on philosophic principles and on the geometric one. It is the Unified Theory of Interactions (UTI).

II. Philosophy of the Unified theory of Interactions The matter is continuous and infrangible, because nothing exists except of matter. The matter cannot to be split by absolutely different kind of objects, for example by means of “absolute emptiness”. The matter has two kinds: tenuous – field (ether, material space, physical vacuum) and compacted – energy substance. And the matter has its unified subpart. The material objects exist in the time because they are changeable and can detect other material objects and can affect them. In chime with this we have a following. III. Basic principles There are two main principles in the base of “Unified theory of interactions”: 1) The “Principle of Absolute Transitions”: The absolute transitions, is momentary transitions between absolutely differentiated conditions of the matter, and they are do not exist in the time. Or, by other words: The transitions between two physical values, that realize only stepwise (in a trice), without intermediate values, do not exist in the nature.

I did GCMS/MS, LCMS of my sample of interest. I got Mass fragments in ionization process. Now facing issues to get the parent molecules name/formula. Due to complexity of sample (its a mixture of compounds) and fragments MS, I could not identify the parent molecules by predicting with basic knowledge of Mass fragments. Is there any free application or database that I can get to know the parent molecule name by inputting the MS fragments values?

And I would like to get experts comments on " What is the best way to predict/analyze/ identify the compounds in a sample by LCMS/MS, GCMS/MS, without using any automatic database paired with instrument."

My question is how to find system-specific ionization potential (IP) tuned value to improve the description of the excited state for a functional in the TD-DFT calculation.

Do I need to run any script for the same?

can anyone give me advise about charge transfer transition of transition metal and rare earth element?

and usually people see the FL and absorption, emission spectra of those materials in glass, and I just want to know how much energy need to ionization the transition metal and rare earth element.

Could you recommend some studying source about it?

MALDI( Matrix Assisted Laser desorption Ionization)

Matrix use in MALDI in positive mode and negative mode

I have been pondering why nickel only exists as the Ni2+ ion in nature. I know that Ni+ and Ni3+ also exist, but unlike iron (Fe), Ni3+ is not nearly as common as Ni2+. So, I have investigated this and arrived at an explanation but haven't quite reached a conclusion yet.

This is how I understand it:

Nickel has an electron configuration of (Ar)4s2_3d8, and iron has (Ar)4s2_3d6.

It's easy to understand the ionization to Fe2+ and Ni2+ because the 4s2 electrons are farther from the nucleus and now easier to remove. It's also easy to comprehend that the ionization energy is higher for iron because the 3d shell in nickel has more electrons, thus shielding more against the nucleus's attractive force.

Ionizing to Fe3+ might be understandable as it might be relatively easy to remove one of iron's only paired electrons in 3d6, and I guess that 3d5 is stable because the shell is half-filled.

But why is it so challenging to ionize nickel's 3d8 to 3d7, 3d6, etc.? Is a shell with 8 electrons already stable? Or why is it so?

I hope to be able to understand this.

What do experts in HiPIMS sputtering think about a possible definition of HiPIMS? Definition: HiPIMS is a high-power density P-DCMS sputtering process with an amount of self-sputtering of target ions, where C < Ysetm/(Yseng+Yserg) < ∞, based on a critical ionization threshold of sputtered target atoms. To reach the critical threshold the -power density (current density multiplied by the discharge voltage) at the target within the pulse has to be about one order of magnitude higher than for conventional DCMS and P-DCMS. Yse secondary emission yields, tm means ions from the target material, ng noble gas, rg reactive gas. Classical (traditional) DCMS and P-DCMS are low-power density processes, gas-ion dominated discharges. If Ysetm is about 0 then target-materiel ionization is almost neglectable. If Ysetm/(Yseng+Yserg) goes to infinity, then self-sustained sputtering, SS-DCMS, a high-power density DCMS as a target-ion dominated discharge is ignited. C is a process and material specific value. C > 0 is describing the onset of LE-HiPIMS (low-energy HiPIMS). This C values have to be highlighted in future scientific investigations. Please study the model of A. Anders: Anders et al., J. Appl. Phys. 121, 171101 (2017). Thanks for your comments!

Take care.

J. Vetter

Hello All

During the gromacs 2023.1 multiple ligand simulation , I have some problems and constraints in the simulation. In the experiments, I used AMBER99sb forcefield.

How to perform multiple ligand simulations

Whether i have to make different topology files for different ligands? because when trying to simulate at the ionization stage to get the ions.tpr file an error occurs as below:

Command line:

gmx grompp -f ions.mdp -c solv.gro -p topol.top -o ions.tpr

Ignoring obsolete mdp entry 'title'

Ignoring obsolete mdp entry 'ns_type'

NOTE 1 [file ions.mdp]:

With Verlet lists the optimal nstlist is >= 10, with GPUs >= 20. Note

that with the Verlet scheme, nstlist has no effect on the accuracy of

your simulation.

Setting the LD random seed to 2095054833

Generated 3486 of the 3486 non-bonded parameter combinations

Generating 1-4 interactions: fudge = 0.5

Generated 3486 of the 3486 1-4 parameter combinations

-------------------------------------------------------

Program: gmx grompp, version 2023.1

Source file: src/gromacs/gmxpreprocess/topio.cpp (line 577)

Fatal error:

Syntax error - File entacapone1_GMX.itp, line 3

Last line read:

'[ atomtypes ]'

Invalid order for directive atomtypes

For more information and tips for troubleshooting, please check the GROMACS

website at http://www.gromacs.org/Documentation/Errors

please help me to solve this problem, and I will be very grateful to you

Thankyou All

CID problems and solutions in LC-MS/MS analysis.

The upper level energies (the abscissas of the Saha-Boltzmann plot) have been modified by adding to them the ionization energy of the lower ionization stages, that is, the energy scale begins in the ground state of the neutral atom. For the z ions, the correction is shown in the attached figure emphasized by red circle.

where is the ionization energy of species k for isolated systems (eV) and is the correction of this quantity for interactions in the plasma. These modifications have only effect for ion lines (z t 1) and are introduced in equation 1a in order to include the data of the different ionization stages in the Saha Boltzmann plot.

Reference Link:

My peptide is Cholecystokinin (CCK8), MW=1142.35 (COOH-D-Y-M-G-W-M-D-F-NH2).

Stock solution in NH4OH 0.05M and working solution in acetonitrile.

I do MS infusion at conc. 500 ng/ml in acetonitrile.

I use two LC/MS machines: Micromass - Quattro Premier XE of Waters (Tamdem Quadrupole) and Applied Biosystems - API 3200 LC/MS/MS (triple quadrupole)

I run ES + but I can not see the peak at 1+, 2+, 3+,4+,...for [M+H], [M+Na], [M+K]

I wonder whether I have missed some other adduct ions that could be created during the ionization?

Or maybe my peptide is being degraded during preparing the sample?

Please give me some advice! Thank you!

In fuel cells hydrogen (H2) is ionized in the anode and is transformed into H+ and e-.

Then H+ moves through the electrolyte membrane towards the cathode, where O2 is flushed. In the meantime, the electrons move from the anode (where they separated from H2) towards the cathode, producing an electron flux, i.e. regenerating an electrical current. In the cathode O2 first captures the electrons and then react with H+ to produce water (and heat).

What I am asking here is: how elemental H2 is forced to separate into two H+ and two e-? I have read that this happens in the anode, but I did not understand how it happens.

Cheers,

Michele

I am trying to detect citrate in LC-MS. I ran the samples in both negative and positive modes. I performed direct injection (without a column) using an ESI ionization source. Thank you very much

I am looking for an active researcher in the area of environmental sciences and Ionization to collaborate with. if anyone kindly indicate.

I am trying to calculate the ionization energy of a metal atom cluster, i know the negative value of HOMO can be used as ionization energy. However, for some clusters, they will me give both alpha and beta mos, anyone can please tell me which one should i use and why? Thanks!

Hello, I'm approaching an untargeted UHPLC-HRMS analysis using ESI source in positive ionization. I am tracing the area intensity of about 20 molecules, of which we do not yet have sufficient structural information and which may be very different from each other. I am having difficulty choosing the internal standard to use in order to normalize the areas. In theory, would any molecule capable of responding adequately in the positive be suitable for normalization activity? Thank you so much, Francesco

I have tried beta carotene detection in LCMSMS with an APCI source using different solvents. But ionization is not happening even when reproducing the previously available data. Please help me.

I would like to calculate the vertical ionization energy of a molecule using Gaussian16. And which is the best method to do it?

I am having difficulties visualizing signal in human astrocyte interphase and metaphase chromosomes hybridized with TelC-Cy3 and CentPB-FAM PNA probes. All I see is noise from the florescent scope (photos attached). The FISH protocol I used is described in the attached paper. So far, the biggest difference I noted was the use of de-ionized formamide for preparing the hybridization buffer.

Can anyone with more experience confirm or deny the impact of ionized formamide on hybridization efficiency?

Thanks

Hi all! I am using a Waters-TQS micro (LC/MS/MS) in negative ionization mode (MRM) to analyse a few compounds. When doing QC injections (i.e., repeated injections from same vial of standards at a certain concentration) the area response keeps going up with each subsequent injection. Now, my method is 20 minutes long. I do recall that negative mode can take some time to stabilize, hence this might be the reason why I see increasing area responses. But, question is how long would you wait for it to stabilize? Or.... is there something else at play?

Thanks for reading and potentially contributing!

Best!

T

Hi everyone!

I am setting up an experiment regarding the analysis of several markers in cells exposed to ionizing radiation. I´m having some thoughts about choosing the most appropriate time, namely 24h after the last exposition to ionizing radiation, 72h or even longer etc.

What do you think is the most appropriate time point?

I am using SRIM code to simulate interaction of charged particle with a material of a known thickness. SRIM gives me the energy loss (ev/A) at different point along the path length (A) into the material as the "IONIZ" in the SRIM output folder. Using the table of the IONIZ file, how can I get a single value in keV/um, which will be an over all average energy loss per unit path length?

Dear Experimentalists,

I have a question regarding to Work function / ionization potential measurement of a semiconductor surface where the surface states are located in the band gap. I was wondering how they are measured in this case? with or without surface states? where is the valence band edge then?

Please share me references if you have.

Thanks a lot

As I understand it so far:

What I'm uncertain about is what exactly these Joules represent, and how they differ from ionizing energy.

My (admittedly elementary) understanding of ionization, is that an electron has to absorb a certain amount of energy that allows it to escape the electron shells, and then the atom becomes an ion. This energy can be expressed in Joules (probably attojoules, but still!)

What I don't understand, is that in Greys, would the ionizing effect of the different types of radiation not already be taken into account by their different energies?

Is it because my description of ionization refers to the gamma ray method of ionization, whereas alpha and beta ionization is more physical (alpha collides and pulls electrons off cells)?

But surely there is still some sort of measure of alpha energy that could make it 'account for more Joules' in the Greys calculation?

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and please ask me to clarify if this is unclear.

Can I able to give an evidence for self ionization of water using DFT ? Or any other computational tools?

Can you suggest any book which gives a simple picture behind the formation of this wave?

Can anyone please share any article showing the minimum volume of sample/ protein concentration to perform a Laser ionization mass spectrometry (LIMS) or any mass spectrometry techniques in general?

Hi

I'm measuring my sample using LC-MS and DI-MS.

When I tried DI-MS first, I got a very low signal about 100 times lower compared to LC-MS results. Futhermore new peaks not observed in LC-MS appears.

I think it is due to the absence of proton source.

So my question is.. Can the sample be ionized if measured without 0.1% FA in ESI-positive mode in DI-MS ?

Only samples and ACN were directly injected to MS. The results show that the signal from the target molecule was measured, however the signal intensity was very low compared to the LC-MS measurement results. When measuring LCMS, flow solvent with ACN99: water 1+0.1% FA was used.

And another question is...

Sodium formate cluster that is used for mass calibration and instrument quality check has already positive charge and I think that sodium formate cluster is possible to some extent without formic acid. I want to know that I'm right.

thank you for reading and have a nice day.

I have myself tried using the basic method but including incomplete ionization to figure out the depletion width however I failed miserably because of many mathematical roadblocks. I was wondering if this had been done in the literature before and I just missed it.

If anyone can help me in this regard then I would be very grateful. Thanks.

What mean by the ionization degree of the plasma injected into the vacuum chamber for sputtering process? What's the relation between this degree and the number of gas ions?

I am working on cryogenic modeling of MOS Transistors and in that case I have to include incomplete ionization. That certainly puts E_A as a very important parameter. So I was just wondering if E_A changes as a function of temperature or only doping?

The Dyna-bead (M-280) protocol calls for a PBS with 0.05% Tween-20 solution to be used to wash and elute mAb labeled beads. Ultimately these beads will be used to enrich peptides out of samples for detection by mass spectrometry. Will the Tween contaminate my peptide samples and inhibit ionization? Is it necessary to use the detergent or can a different one be used?

Dear all,

What is the criteria for selecting the positive mode or negative mode in LC-MS/MS analysis?

In brief, when is positive and negative mode of ionizations are used inn LC-MS analysis?

The problem is that I have a UPS spectrum like the one in the attached photo. This spectrum goes to zero near E=1.5 eV without having a step near this value. the nearest step is about 5 eV. Most of the information I found in literature deals with spectra goes to zero around zero eV but I didn't find anything related to my case.

Can I calculate the work function using the width of the spectrum? If not, what is the correct procedure to follow to calculate the work function and the ionization potential energy?

Thanx in advance.

Attached an example and how I tried to analyse it.

As we increase the doping concentration in silicon, even at room temperature the dopants are not fully ionized. Mathematically it all makes sense. But what is the physical reason behind this phenomenon?

Now LNP is the most famous star over the world thanks to ionizable lipids, like ALC-0315, SM-102 and MC3 (Onpattro, approved by FDA in 2018), which are neutral at physiological pH and trun to positve charge at a low pH. Just like other pH-sensitive materials. Although pH-sensitive liposomes encapsulating RNA have been developed for decades.

So, why these ionizable lipids and not other pH-sensitive materials? And why did it take so long to apply in clinic.

emmm....It's hard to describe my confusion excatly....

Just like a sad feeling about active targeting nanoparticles, which also have been developed for many years and have no application in clinic yet.

The electron and photon are extensively interrelated, and therefore should share many common properties, equalities and laws. According to De Broglie, one such law is the Planck-Einstein relation, stating that as wavelength (i.e. radial orbit path) decreases, energy increases. An electron at a smaller orbit (today believed to be the ground state) most assuredly has a lower wavelength, and therefore should display a higher energy, not a “lower” energy level of the so called ground state.

Bringing this question up previously, two primary responses are typically offered... the "negative energy" aspect taught in high school, and the "pay no attention to classical mechanics" response. The last I checked, negative energy does not exist. Even it if did, a "zero" electron energy believed to exist at ionization is still greater than a -13.6eV at the believed minimum radius ground state, and therefore does not answer the question. As far as the second typical response, some sort of waving of the hands is offered, stating that the electron does not obey classical mechanics. Ok, I'll bite for argument sake, but then please explain why even the Schrodinger probability wave function also states that electron energy is minimum at a smaller radius ground state, and increases with a radial distance increase away from the proton. No so-called classical mechanics here.

I propose a model of Hydrogen for consideration, and welcome any peer review comments:

1) When the electron gains photonic energy, its orbiting radius is reduced and therefore its orbiting path per cycle decreases, equating to a higher cyclic frequency, equating to a higher energy per the Planck-Einstein relationship [so far so good, nothing strange here].

2) As it’s radius (r) decreases its Coulomb attraction force to the proton increases by r squared, and therefore so does its Potential Energy (PE) by 1/r (since E=F x dist). Therefore to remain in this particular lower radius increased energy level state, its orbiting velocity must then also increase to remain in this stable orbit, thereby increasing its associated Kinetic Energy (KE). [if you’re going to wave your hands here and say that classical mechanics doesn't apply to atomics, then state WHY and give an explanation, please don’t just regurgitate something you have read. Electrons have mass, and it is orbiting another mass. A very "classical" situation].

3) This increasing orbital velocity (frequency) has two limits: a) The speed of light, and b) Ionization "escape velocity" of the electron mass.

4) Once either of these velocities occur, the electron must then, a) convert completely into a photon at the speed of light, b) completely ionize (escape) from the proton, or c) convert part of its energy into a photon plus transform itself to a lower energy (higher radius) energy level [nothing too strange here unless there is a classical hand waving fetish].

In other words, attempt to purge the incorrect visualization thinking that as an electron gets further and further away from the proton, that it is closer and closer to becoming ionized. Attempt to think about WHY and HOW the electron would want to ionize, and you’ll come up with the above postulate. In fact, attempt to think about WHY only particular wavelength photons will be absorbed by the Hydrogen electron. Perhaps it is because it has the same geometric orbital size or a harmonic of that size. I have actually derived this harmonic to be the Fine Structure Constant / 2 utilizing classical mechanics, and by doing so, believe I have also discovered why and how the quantum aspect of the electron energy levels must occur.

- J.L. Brady

Hi.

I wanna discuss with you the difference between Solubility and Ionization in the solution.

For example,

Salicylic acid (SA) has very low solubility in water. However, it is a strong acid, which means that the H can be ionized from -COOH in the SA molecule.

Therefore, I'm confused that the difference between Solubility and Ionization in the solution environment.

Can you discuss this?

Thank you so much.

Using UV-Visible data, electronegativity and first ionization energy i have calculated the bandedge position of ZnO. Now I want to calculate the bandedge position of Al-doped ZnO. Can anybody suggest to me any method?

The water ionization process for HHO cell process.

Does anyone know how the geiger statement is activated with nonlocal ionization coefficients for avalanche triggerring probability extraction?

Hi!

I'm studying on the mechanism of one reaction.

I think formaldehyde is generated as byproducts during the reaction

So, Identification of formaldehyde is a strong proof for mechanism that I suggested.

The reaction is processed in solvent in septum cuvette.

Formaldehyde has a very low b.p(-19 °C), so even if it is generated, it will fly into the air.

I heard that LCMS has a problem to ionize formaldehyde molecule.

FTIR is also has a problem that one of the products has a C=O group.

So I can't know whether C=O group is from formaldehyde or one of the products.

How can I identify the presence of formaldehyde?

I read some paper, and it said that if the conductivity obtained in dc measurement is identical to that obtained in ac measurement means that a material has ionic conductivity and electrical conductivity.

So I wonder few things,

1. What is the difference btw ac measurement and dc measurement?

2. What is a normal method to get an electrical conductivity and ionic conductivity?

(ex. ionic conductivity - dc measurement ,,)

3. In my knowledge, the only difference between ionic conductivity and electrical conductivity is charge carrier. (IC-ion, EC- electron)

Then how can any materials be only ionic conductive or electric conductive?

Is it related to electronegativity or ionization tendency?)

4. If the results obtained in dc&ac measurement are similar, why does it mean that the material have ionic and electric conductivity?

Thank you for answering to my questions.

I hope you to be happy always.

Thank you,

Hansam.

W, Mo, Re, Os, V, Nb- these are common refractory metals, and I know of volatile oxides of W, Re, Mo and V. What about other metals?

If this is the common trend, then why is this so? are the metal atoms are glued so strongly together inside metal lattice (Ion cores mediated by delocalized electron cloud) that intermediation of anions (like Oxide) significantly weaken the cohesion? Does that mean the "adhesive action" of anions compared to electrons is much weak when it comes to refractive metals? Why is this so?

Starting from Refractory metal block and gaseous oxygen and ending up to gaseous oxide, the two ways must consume the same amount of energy.

Volatilization of metal + disassociation of oxygen+ ionization of oxygen+ionization of refractory metal=Oxidation of bulk metal+ volatilization of oxide

But conservation of energy cannot provide further insights.

Can you please explain links between high cohesion between metallic ionic cores mediated by electrons and weak adhesion of ionic cores in presence of oxides?

Hello,

I want to consider ionization potential for drug molecule before docking using Autodock Vina can any body tell me which tool (free) can be used to do that?

Thank you,

Sainitin

Hi,

I'm currently trying to simulate a model at low temperatures, around 20K, using Incomplete Ionization. However, I keep receiving RHS on input contains NaN results. And in the output, there is a [(dd_real::log): Non-positive argument] error. I would like to know if anyone knows what equations are used in incomplete ionization that would cause that? I've checked the sdevice's manual, no equations lead me to believe it will cause a log calculation error. The physics parameters enabled are Fermi, ConstantMobility, NoBandGapNarrowing, and Temperature. I've run the model using no incomplete ionization enabling and it works properly.

Further addendum (v.1):

I was able to run the model at 40K with the above parameters and with incomplete ionization enabled.

Many Thanks,

Leon

1、I want to simulate a PIN photodiode (under reverse voltage), and i region is active layer (absorb)

2、I used the impact ionization model

3、When the negative voltage increases to 50V，the simulation does not converge, and it oscillates back and forth between positive and negative output currents

4、so I want to ask how to solve this convergence problem, changing method? or model?

5、need help! Thanks!

I want to plot ionization spectra for Singly, doubly, and triply ionized molecule i.e. to be more specific is the x-ray spectra for singly to triply ionized atom or molecule using Gaussian or Orca ?

Helo everyone I'm upon developing new method for analyzing clavulanic acid using Ms/Ms with ESI in the negative mode and the problem what I have that I can't find a proper internal standard that ionized in the -ESI and match the same chromatography conditions of it Please any suggestions? and what is the possible m/z ions in the -ESI for the suggested internals?

I am a beginner in Gaussian 16 and trying to learn the BEB method. I finished calculating the optimized structure using DFT (B3LYP/6-31G(d)). I have attached the equation used for BEB calculation, where t= T/B, u = U/B (T= Incoming energy of the electron, B= Binding energy, U= Orbital Kinetic energy, N= Orbital occupation number).

I am stuck with extracting ingredients i.e B, U, N from the Gaussian output file. It would be great if someone can point out what I am missing and how to proceed with it.

I am looking for publicly available computer code to calculate electron induced cross sections for the ionization / excitation of molecular targets

Dear colleagues,

I am conducting an experiment to identify un-targeted compounds in food using the GC-MS (TSQ 8000, Thermo Scientific). By using strong ionization energy (70eV), the precursor ions were barely detected. Therefore, it is difficult to identify chromatographic peak using identification software for LC-MS (e.g Compound Discoverer, MPP,...). Besides, the identification of the chromatographic peak is difficult to detect visually.

What software should be used to determine the chromatographic peak in the GC-MS method?

Thanks.

I prepared a 1 WT% solution of sodium alginate and diluted it to 0.25 WT% with ionized water. I first tested the particle size of this 0.25 WT% sodium alginate solution and kept it stirred at room temperature for one week after the test. After one week, I found that this 0.25 WT% sodium alginate solution produced a lot of small white precipitates. I would like to know why the 0.25 WT% sodium alginate solution, which was dissolved before, has precipitated after continuous stirring.

In fact, I prepared another 0.25WT% sodium alginate solution in the same way, and this solution was left on the lab bench without stirring after I measured its particle size, and a week later I saw some white precipitates, but not as much as the stirred one. I also wonder if the polymer molecules in the solution have gathered together over time? Why did they clump together?

I would appreciate it if you could answer my question.

Hi all,

I'm planning to analyze for PFOA using LC/MS/MS, however, my solution is containing 0.5M Na2SO4- someone told me it can interfere with the ionization process of the instrument. Though, I don't want to use any ion exchange filter since it can also filter out the PFOA. I am also using internal standard addition in my analysis, and I think this can correct any interference from the salt. Another colleague of mine said with a small injection volume (10 uL) in my protocol, the mobile phase will be able to dilute the salt content to the point its effects will be negligible.

Thus, is it possible to inject 10 uL of 0.5M Na2SO4 solution to analyze for PFOA using LC/MS/MS without additional separation step prior to the analysis? I want to hear more opinions from other experts for this. Please let me know your thought/experience.

Thanks!

Hi everyone

I'm planning to do a potential energy surface scan over a specific bond for a doubly ionized Methyl Chloride (CH3Cl2+ over C-Cl bond) using Gaussian 16 (UNIX-based operating system), my question is, how to extract the energy at each point from the output file and how to specify the bond that we want to do the scan over, in the code,

the code I initially used is shown here: (I feel there should be a line specifying the CCl bond)

%chk=CCl.chk

%mem=9GB

%NProcShared=4

#scan td=(nstates=6) wb97xd/aug-cc-pvtz

CH3Cl neutral GS syn

2 1

C

H 1 B1

H 1 B2 2 A1

H 1 B3 3 A2 2 0.0

Cl 1 B4 4 A3 3 0.0

B1=1.07011

B2=1.19035

B3=1.19148

B4=1.72691

A1=94.56838

A2=69.00098

A3=52.79175

I'm doing my Master Thesis on a new design for the Ionization Stage for a micropropulsion System and I would like to learn how to use some open source software suitable for the analysis of Plasma Physics.

In a previous discussion PIConGPU was pointed out. Do you think it could be suitable for the analysis of the plasma physics inside an hollow cathode?

If yes, how should I start to learn it?

If no, do you have any other suggestion?

Thank you very much for your help!

I am looking for information regarding pH influence for the peaks shift in the low aliphatic region of the protein NMR spectrum.

In my research, I've performed fragment-based screening of the protein with NMR titrations and I've come across a problem. I've observed shifting of the peak around 0.4 ppm which was dependent on small pH changes (in the range of approx. 0.5). At first, I've taken this as the binding of my fragment but the change was reversed just by the adjustment to the initial pH.

I am wondering why, in this not ionizable area, there is such big sensitivity for pH. I would be grateful for any hints regarding this topic.

I found many diverse views taking about the calculation of calcium ionized depend on Albumin level and total calcium

they are so different and can not trust any

Hi all,

I am working on mid-IR spectroscopy of donor bound excitons in the Si host. I am using an FTIR spectrometer with InSb detector and + KBr or CaF2 beamsplitter. I apply above-bandgap excitation at 671 nm with power levels up to 40 mW. The donors are ion-implanted and consequently drive-in diffused. I need to observe a PL emission at the vicinity of 3 um, while the next highest transition is at 2.2 um, while donor ionization energy is 2.1 um. I observe a broad emission from 2.3-2.4 um to 3.2 um. This emission possesses multiple peaks but overlapping with each other. The emission at 3 um is barely recognized. There is a temperature and power dependency of emission intensity but not much change for the shape. I want to identify the originating factor for this emission. What should I do? How can I isolate and amplify the desired emission>

In many textbooks about basics of semiconductor, they say dopants of extrinsic silicon are fully ionized and explain many equations based on this hypothesis.

But I still don't get why all the dopants in silicon are ionized for extrinsic silicon with shallow impurities. Especially, I wonder how one can get the fermi level of extrinsic silicon with density of dopants and effective density of states.

Also, for heavy doped silicon how we describe the energy band?

I understand that there might be huge differences between LogD and LogP for ionizable compounds. Normally, logD should be lower than logP for ionizable compounds.

But can LogD value be significantly higher than LogP, say in my case LogP = 0.05 and LogD = 4.02. I am using ocatnol/DPBS pH7.4 for determining LogD and ocatnol/MilliQ for determining LogP. Please comment.

I am assuming the resulting insertion/agglomeration in the presence of a surfactant or the agglomeration of surfactant may reduce the rate of ionization. The mobility of the ion may also be reduced in the presence of the surface-active agent. Kindly share me the exact/ probable reason / mechanism repression the mass spectra a compound in the presence of surface-active compounds. Interestingly fluorinated surfactants such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOSA) could be employed for ESI-MS without a significant decrease in sensitivity!!

Kindly explain/ share your view.

Thanks

Best Kind Regards

I understand that there might be huge differences between LogD and LogP for ionizable compounds. Normally, logD should be lower than logP for ionizable compounds.

But can LogD value be significantly higher than LogP, say in my case LogP = 0.05 and LogD = 4.02. I am using ocatnol/DPBS pH7.4 for determining LogD and ocatnol/MilliQ for determining LogP. Please comment.