Specific conductivity electronic

Physical Properties. Most of the physical properties discussed herein depend on the direction of measurement as compared to the bedding plane of the coal. Additionally, these properties vary according to the history of the piece of coal. Properties also vary between pieces because of coal s britde nature and the crack and pore stmcture. One example concerns electrical conductivity. Absolute values of coal sample specific conductivity are not easy to determine. A more characteristic value is the energy gap for transfer of electrons between molecules, which is deterrnined by a series of measurements over a range of temperatures and is unaffected by the presence of cracks. The velocity of sound is also dependent on continuity in the coal. 

In Chapter 5 we identified metals by their high electrical conductivity. Now we can explain why they conduct electric current so well. It is because there are some electrons present in the crystal lattice that are extremely mobile. These conduction electrons move throughout the metallic crystal without specific attachment to particular atoms. The alkali elements form metals because of the ease of freeing one electron per atom to provide a reservoir of conduction electrons. The ease of freeing these conduction electrons derives from the stability of the residual, inert gas-like atoms. 

We report here studies on a polymer fi1m which is formed by the thermal polymerization of a monomeric complex tris(5,5 -bis[(3-acrylvl-l-propoxy)carbonyll-2,2 -bipyridine)ruthenium(11) as its tosylate salt,I (4). Polymer films formed from I (poly-I) are insoluble in all solvents tested and possess extremely good chemical and electrochemical stability. Depending on the formal oxidation state of the ruthenium sites in poly-I the material can either act as a redox conductor or as an electronic (ohmic) conductor having a specific conductivity which is semiconductorlike in magnitude. 

In substitutional metallic solid solutions and in liquid alloys the experimental data have been described by Epstein and Paskin (1967) in terms of a predominant frictional force which leads to the accumulation of one species towards the anode. The relative movement of metallic ion cores in an alloy phase is related to the scattering cross-section for the conduction electrons, which in turn can be correlated with the relative resistance of the pure metals. Thus iron, which has a higher specific resistance than copper, will accumulate towards the anode in a Cu-Fe alloy. Similarly in a germanium-lithium alloy, the solute lithium atoms accumulate towards the cathode. In liquid alloys the same qualitative effect is observed, thus magnesium accumulates near the cathode in solution in bismuth, while uranium, which is in a higher Group of the Periodic Table than bismuth, accumulated near the anode in the same solvent. 

In metals, valence electrons are conduction electrons, so they are free to move along the solid. On the contrary, valence electrons in insulators are located around fixed sites for instance, in an ionic solid they are bound to specific ions. Semiconductors can be regarded as an intermediate case between metals and insulators valence electrons can be of both types, free or bound. 

The density of states at the Fermi-level N(pp) is responsible for many electronic properties, e.g. the electronic contribution to the low-temperature specific heat of a solid, and the Pauli paramagnetic moment of conduction electrons. The specific heat contribution may be written as ... 

It was noted earlier that the charge density of a narrow resonance band lies within the atoms rather than in the interstitial regions of the crystal in contrast to the main conduction electron density. In this sense it is sometimes said to be localized. However, the charge density from each state in the band is divided among many atoms and it is only when all states up to the Fermi level have contributed that the correct average number of electrons per atom is produced. In a rare earth such as terbium the 8 4f electrons are essentially in atomic 4f states and the number of 4f electrons per atom is fixed without reference to the Fermi level. In this case the f-states are also said to be locaUzed but in a very different sense. Unfortunately the two senses are often confused in literature on the actinides and, in order not to do so here, we shall refer to resonant states and Mott-localized states specifically. 

A large number of oxides which are commonly solid insulators at room temperature (e.g., A1203) yield highly conducting (specific conductance > 10 ohm-1 cm-1) melts on fusion. Some of these melts are undoubtedly ionic conductors whereas others are electronic conductors. It is, however, not always possible to differentiate between these two general types since both mechanisms may be operative to comparable extents at a particular temperature. Relatively few experiments have been reported in which reliable estimates of the transport numbers of either ions or electrons could be made. The subdivision in this section into the two general types of conductors is thus not to be interpreted as rigid. 

Solutions containing a high concentration of excess electrons display a transition to the metallic state. Thus, for sodium-ammonia solutions in the concentration region 1-6 M the specific conductance increases by about three orders of magnitude, and the temperature coefficient of the conductance is very small (27). Similar behavior is exhibited by other metal-ammonia solutions (but surprisingly, not by concentrated lithium-methylamine solutions ) (10) and by metal-molten salt solutions (17). 

It is, however, not clear at present whether such a model can be applied to metal solutions. It is worth mentioning again at this point that the specific conductivity of a saturated solution of lithium in methyl-amine (10) (concentration 5.5M) has been found to be 28 ohm l cm."-1, which is two orders of magnitude lower than that for a corresponding saturated metal-ammonia solution. This experimental result seems to indicate that the overlap between electron trapping centers may not be... 

The specific conductivity (y) is a measure of the mobility of ions in an electrolyte or electrons in a metallic conductor. Thus, y is about 1 or 107 S/m for a 0.1 kmol/m3 aqueous salt solution or for a metal such as iron, respectively. Such a difference in charge mobility makes the temperature dependence of % [i-e.,(l/x)3x/97k] positive for ions of about 2.5% per K, but negative for metals and alloys of approximately an order of magnitude lower (Prentice, 1991). 

The use of a bulk-like dielectric constant, such as those in Equations (2.334)-(2.336), neglects the specific contribution given by the surface to the dielectric response of the metal specimen. For metal particles, such a contribution is often introduced in the model by considering the surface as an additional source of scattering for the metal conduction electrons, which consequently affects the relaxation time r [69], Experiments indicate that the precise chemical nature of the surface also plays a role [70], The presence of a surface affects the nonlocal part of the metal response as well, giving rise to surface-assisted excitations of electron-hole pairs. The consequences of these excitations appear to be important for short molecule-metal distances [71], It is worth remarking that, when the size of the metal particle becomes very small (2-3 nm), the electron behaviour is affected by the confinement, and the metal response deviates from that of the bulk (quantum size effects) [70],... 

Such models do not seem to explain the high specific conductivity observed in electronically conducting compounds. In an alkali metal, there is one conducting electron per atom. If some electronically conducting polymers are to conduct to within 1 or even 10% of this, it would seem to require 0.01 or 0.1 conductivity electrons per atom, and that is difficult to visualize as a consequence of surface adsorption of ions, which will seldom exceed 0 = 0.1 for surface occupancy. The mechanism by which such adsorption stimulates conductance inside the fibers has not yet appeared in understandable form. 

The difference between the specific conductances of electrolytic and of electronic conductors is clearly shown in Table 2. Also included are the values of conductances of absolutely pure water and of the so called conductance water, which is mostly used as a solvent for electrochemical measurements. 

---