| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Robert Clark" |
| Date: |
24 Sep 2007 01:13:57 PM |
| Object: |
Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
.
|
|
| User: "dlzc" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
24 Sep 2007 02:29:03 PM |
|
|
Dear Robert Clark:
On Sep 24, 11:13 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully*
ionize xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization
energy in several sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so
the list should go up to 54, right? But I've never seen
anything other than up to only the 3rd ionization energy
for xenon. Have the higher ones not been measured?
I would think you could get some clue to the ionization energies by
using positrons to neutralize orbital electrons, and reviewing the
resulting spray.
Are you expecting something odd?
David A. Smith
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 03:07:19 PM |
|
|
On Sep 24, 3:29 pm, dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
Dear Robert Clark:
On Sep 24, 11:13 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:> I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully*
ionize xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization
energy in several sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so
the list should go up to 54, right? But I've never seen
anything other than up to only the 3rd ionization energy
for xenon. Have the higher ones not been measured?
I would think you could get some clue to the ionization energies by
using positrons to neutralize orbital electrons, and reviewing the
resulting spray.
Are you expecting something odd?
David A. Smith
Thanks. Sabella's links look like they might give the answer.
The question stems from this discussion:
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy, sci.astro, sci.physics,
sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics.fusion
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:47:28 -0700
Local: Thurs, Sep 20 2007 4:47 pm
Subject: Stored ionized gas for ion drives.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/1097aea2c8e51f5b/cb4c75eb5630f41d
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized form so that we
could apply all the power available to accelerating the ions rather
than some going to ionizing the gas.
It is true that only a relatively low proportion of the power goes to
ionizing the gas, such as xenon, in an ion drive. But the reason is
that the xenon gas is only being partially ionized, perhaps only one
or two electrons being knocked off.
Then a gas that is fully ionized would undergo higher velocity since
it would have a higher positive charge being acted on by the
electrostatic forces.
That the xenon is actually only minimally ionized in an ion drive is
illuminated by the data Sabella supplied in his post: 41,000 eV
required to remove the last electron from the xenon atom. 1 eV counts
as about 100 kJ/mol. So this means removing that final electron would
have required 4 billion joules per mol of xenon, about 30 million
joules per gram.
This is just for that single last electron. The total for removing
all of them would be in the hundreds of millions of joules per gram.
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "dlzc" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 04:01:46 PM |
|
|
Dear Robert Clark:
On Sep 25, 1:07 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
....
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so
the list should go up to 54, right? But I've never seen
anything other than up to only the 3rd ionization energy
for xenon. Have the higher ones not been measured?
I would think you could get some clue to the ionization
energies by using positrons to neutralize orbital electrons,
and reviewing the resulting spray.
Are you expecting something odd?
Thanks. Sabella's links look like they might give the
answer. The question stems from this discussion:
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy, sci.astro, sci.physics,
sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics.fusion
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:47:28 -0700
Local: Thurs, Sep 20 2007 4:47 pm
Subject: Stored ionized gas for ion drives.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/109...
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized
form so that we could apply all the power available
to accelerating the ions rather than some going to
ionizing the gas.
A high temperature plasma.
It is true that only a relatively low proportion of the
power goes to ionizing the gas, such as xenon, in
an ion drive.
.... which is why that gas was chosen, because realtively little power
is available.
But the reason is that the xenon gas is only being
partially ionized, perhaps only one or two electrons
being knocked off.
One.
Then a gas that is fully ionized would undergo
higher velocity since it would have a higher positive
charge being acted on by the electrostatic forces.
Please study "specific impulse".
That the xenon is actually only minimally ionized
in an ion drive is illuminated by the data Sabella
supplied in his post: 41,000 eV required to remove
the last electron from the xenon atom. 1 eV counts
as about 100 kJ/mol. So this means removing that
final electron would have required 4 billion joules
per mol of xenon, about 30 million joules per gram.
Much much more than you could ever get out as thrust.
This is just for that single last electron. The total
for removing all of them would be in the hundreds
of millions of joules per gram.
Take out that one, and it would avalanche the rest of them... in a
plasma.
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/journal/issues/ApJL/v587n1/17016/17016.html
I'm thinking you don't get 54 electrons removed at less than 1 million
Kelvin.
And has been pointed out, the neutrons hurt the specific impulse.
Much more than the exposed 54 protons will allow acceleration. You'd
be *much* better off with 54 individual protons, aka. hydrogen plasma.
David A. Smith
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Dishman" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
28 Sep 2007 08:12:59 AM |
|
|
"dlzc" <dlzc1@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1190754106.555142.65130@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Dear Robert Clark:
On Sep 25, 1:07 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
....
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized
form so that we could apply all the power available
to accelerating the ions rather than some going to
ionizing the gas.
A high temperature plasma.
No, a plasma is a mix of ionised atoms and electrons,
he wants to store _just_ the atoms! As Uncle Al said,
consider the Coulomb forces. Robert has no grasp on
practicalities.
George
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
28 Sep 2007 07:58:06 PM |
|
|
On Sep 28, 9:12 am, "George Dishman" <geo...@briar.demon.co.uk> wrote:
"dlzc" <dl...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1190754106.555142.65130@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Dear Robert Clark:
On Sep 25, 1:07 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized
form so that we could apply all the power available
to accelerating the ions rather than some going to
ionizing the gas.
A high temperature plasma.
No, a plasma is a mix of ionised atoms and electrons,
he wants to store _just_ the atoms! As Uncle Al said,
consider the Coulomb forces. Robert has no grasp on
practicalities.
George
Actually there is a lot of research on storing plasmas of only one
charge, all positive or all negative, because fusion research.
See the discussion here:
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy, sci.astro, sci.physics,
sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics.fusion
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:53:21 -0700
Local: Fri, Sep 28 2007 8:53 pm
Subject: Re: Stored ionized gas for ion drives.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/msg/c5931e615c63004b
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \dlzc" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
28 Sep 2007 08:44:54 PM |
|
|
Dear Robert Clark:
"Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1191027486.540416.321170@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 28, 9:12 am, "George Dishman" <geo...@briar.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
"dlzc" <dl...@cox.net> wrote in message
....
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized
form so that we could apply all the power available
to accelerating the ions rather than some going to
ionizing the gas.
A high temperature plasma.
No, a plasma is a mix of ionised atoms and electrons,
he wants to store _just_ the atoms! As Uncle Al said,
consider the Coulomb forces. Robert has no grasp on
practicalities.
Actually there is a lot of research on storing
plasmas of only one charge, all positive or all
negative, because fusion research.
These will require a lot of "iron" and energy to contain them.
More than an equivalent neutral plasma. Now consider that the
necessary ionization energy (yielding nucleii at ~0 kinetic
energy) is zero. So all non-containment applied energy produces
thrust.
If I were writing a story...
David A. Smith
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 06:25:15 PM |
|
|
Robert Clark wrote:
[snip]
I wanted to use ions stored already in fully ionized form
[snip crap]
You are an idiot. Calculate the coulomb repulsion of a mole of
Xe(54+) stored in a liter of volume. Whatcha gonna store it in,
idiot? Presumably a material that does not contain electrons?
Xe(54+) is gonna be a rather, ah, vigorous oxidizing agent.
Then a gas that is fully ionized would undergo higher velocity since
it would have a higher positive charge being acted on by the
electrostatic forces.
[snip rest of crap]
Fucking imbecile. YOU DON'T WANT VELOCITY, JACKASS. You want
momentum. Velocity is a waste of energy, (mv^2)/2m when momentum only
builds as mv. You want the drive to ***** lead balls.
Bob Clark
Ineducable idiot.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 07:24:19 PM |
|
|
On Sep 25, 7:25 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
...
Ineducable idiot.
"The harshly you ridicule someone else, the more likely you are to
be wrong yourself."
- Anonymous
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 07:55:48 PM |
|
|
Robert Clark wrote:
On Sep 25, 7:25 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
...
Ineducable idiot.
"The harshly you ridicule someone else, the more likely you are to
be wrong yourself."
Elitism insists the better is preferable to the worse. Uncle Al is an
elitist.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
24 Sep 2007 01:25:13 PM |
|
|
On 24 sep, 14:13, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizati=
on_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
I guess not.
Even the CRC Handbook notes only the first 3.
Andr=E9 Michaud
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
26 Sep 2007 10:28:35 PM |
|
|
On Sep 24, 8:25 pm, wrote:
On 24 sep, 14:13, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ioniza=
tion_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
I guess not.
Even the CRC Handbook notes only the first 3.
Andr=E9 Michaud
--------------------
and Andre
you probably alreadt heard and saw -why it i s so ..........
THERE IS NO DIRECT CONECTION BETWEEN
TH ENUMBER OF PROTONS AND ELECRONS-
***IN A HEAVY ATOM !!***
it is one of my my copyrights since 1993
(which i repeat it on and on along years
yet t on the long run it will enter into the blockhads parrots
or croock heads ....!!)
ATB
Yehiel Porat
--------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angelo" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
27 Sep 2007 07:26:00 AM |
|
|
On 27 Set, 05:28, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
THERE IS NO DIRECT CONECTION BETWEEN
TH ENUMBER OF PROTONS AND ELECRONS-
***IN A HEAVY ATOM !!***
Well, I'm just curious to know if you accept
*charge conservation* in all other instances,
but not in *heavy atoms* (i.e. an exception),
or you do not accept charge conservation at all.
it is one of my my copyrights since 1993
(which i repeat it on and on along years
Didn't know that such claim dates back to 1993.
[snip]
ATB
Yehiel Porat
---------------------------
Ciao, Angelo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
27 Sep 2007 10:03:35 AM |
|
|
On Sep 27, 2:26 pm, Angelo <patri...@libero.it> wrote:
On 27 Set, 05:28, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
THERE IS NO DIRECT CONECTION BETWEEN
TH ENUMBER OF PROTONS AND ELECRONS-
***IN A HEAVY ATOM !!***
Well, I'm just curious to know if you accept
*charge conservation* in all other instances,
but not in *heavy atoms* (i.e. an exception),
or you do not accept charge conservation at all.
---------------
yes i accept charge conservation
but i dont accept that you really know
how many Protons are positively charged
a hint
ddi you ever heared about beta radiation
or eelctron ccapture of the nuc ??
Hadrond are changing their charge by electron
emmition or capture
and you do0nt know where and when
and in waht time point it happence
iow
youi dont realy can flow the elctric charge situation
during a long time for any single Atom
may be you can do it in a gross way
by statistica; data
but not in a single Atom along time scale
and it becomes more doninant
as the Atom becomes heavier !!!
not all chamists are aware of
nuclear proccesses.....
ATB
Y>Porat
---------------------------------
it is one of my my copyrights since 1993
(which i repeat it on and on along years
Didn't know that such claim dates back to 1993.
[snip]
ATB
Yehiel Porat
---------------------------
Ciao, Angelo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angelo" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
03 Oct 2007 01:45:45 PM |
|
|
On 27 Set, 17:03, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 27, 2:26 pm, Angelo <patri...@libero.it> wrote:> On 27 Set, 05:28, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
THERE IS NO DIRECT CONECTION BETWEEN
TH ENUMBER OF PROTONS AND ELECRONS-
***IN A HEAVY ATOM !!***
Well, I'm just curious to know if you accept
*charge conservation* in all other instances,
but not in *heavy atoms* (i.e. an exception),
or you do not accept charge conservation at all.
---------------
yes i accept charge conservation
OK (1)
but i dont accept that you really know
how many Protons are positively charged
Not clear: if a proton isn't positively charged,
then it's not a proton; however, see below.
Let's pick, for simlicity now, a non radioactive
isotope of a (neutal) atom. (2)
I'll (momentarily) take somewhat your point of view.
Then, if a proton becomes neutral (i.e. becomes
somehow a neutron), there will be a neutron that
becomes positive (i.e. becomes somehow a proton).
This process may be repeated, but in every case
the totat electric charge of the nucleous remains
the same, and charge conservation is obeyed.
IOW, such *coupled* exchange processes are allowed
from the point of view of charge conservation.
a hint
ddi you ever heared about beta radiation
or eelctron ccapture of the nuc ??
Yes, but those happen for a *radioactive*
isotope. You seem to postulate that beta
emission and electron capture are occurring
in every case.
Hadrond are changing their charge by electron
emmition or capture
and you do0nt know where and when
and in waht time point it happence
iow
youi dont realy can flow the elctric charge situation
"flow" stands for "follow", I suppose.
during a long time for any single Atom
may be you can do it in a gross way
by statistica; data
but not in a single Atom along time scale
and it becomes more doninant
as the Atom becomes heavier !!!
But if you (as you said) accept (1),
you must conclude that those
charge fluctuations add up to zero,
and not statistically, in every tiniest
time interval.
So, as long as we are in the conditions of (2)
the electric charge of of the nucleous is a
*constant*. In such cases that constant
strongly affects both physical and chemical
properties of the atoms, at the point that you
can virtually attach to each atom as specified
in (2) a label like 'trademark', 'copyright', or so :).
That's why Nickel isn't Cobalt or Copper.
Or Gold isn't Platinum or Mercury.
Perhaps you would realize that all the above reasoning
applies equally to both light and heavy nuclei
not all chamists are aware of
nuclear proccesses.....
Maybe, but a bit irrelevant.
ATB
Y>Porat
---------------------------------
Ciao, Angelo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
06 Oct 2007 04:55:27 AM |
|
|
On Oct 3, 8:45 pm, Angelo <patri...@libero.it> wrote:
On 27 Set, 17:03, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 27, 2:26 pm, Angelo <patri...@libero.it> wrote:> On 27 Set, 05:28, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
THERE IS NO DIRECT CONECTION BETWEEN
TH ENUMBER OF PROTONS AND ELECRONS-
***IN A HEAVY ATOM !!***
Well, I'm just curious to know if you accept
*charge conservation* in all other instances,
but not in *heavy atoms* (i.e. an exception),
or you do not accept charge conservation at all.
---------------
yes i accept charge conservation
OK (1)
but i dont accept that you really know
how many Protons are positively charged
Not clear: if a proton isn't positively charged,
then it's not a proton; however, see below.
Let's pick, for simlicity now, a non radioactive
isotope of a (neutal) atom. (2)
I'll (momentarily) take somewhat your point of view.
Then, if a proton becomes neutral (i.e. becomes
somehow a neutron), there will be a neutron that
becomes positive
not necessarily
think abou t the energy needede to change an 'orbit' in the Atom
and think about the energy asociated with
eelctron capture or betta emmition
it is another order of magitude
trhe nuclear energies are muchbigger than
eelctronic chenical ones!!
iow simpler words
he lectrons in nucear processes are shot
completely out or in the Atom!!
2
you gave agood example of platinum and Gold!!
and realy in many cases platinum isotps
(of a shoert life) are misatkenly
considered as Gold
and viceversa 9i dont remember if gold has isotops
anyway it is in other elements a common case !!
and that is actually a good case
for my claime
that you dont really know to define neighbouring
elements
3
see my current thread:
'the number of electrons in a heavy Atom'
we entered there even to the
mass spectograph issue
and i show there
how those measurments are actually of
**rations** between electric charge and mass(and not absolute values
of mass or charge !!
and since only a ration
a lot of mistakes are on your way !!
for instance
may be you can make a right evaluation betwee
neibouring elements Z to Z+1 or Z+2
but youcanr make a sure extrapolation between
say silicon and Gold
becauase they are too far away from each other
and the further they are
the bigger is the interpolation error !
and that interpoaltion from
silicon to Z=platinum
does not make you sure that thiat Z you got by
extarpolation is realy the rigth Z !!
(the meswurement is only anindirect measurment
with a lot of potential mistakes on your way
due to measurment tools handicaps (dsiability ))
ATB
Y.Porat
----------------------
(i.e. becomes somehow a proton).
This process may be repeated, but in every case
the totat electric charge of the nucleous remains
the same, and charge conservation is obeyed.
IOW, such *coupled* exchange processes are allowed
from the point of view of charge conservation.
a hint
ddi you ever heared about beta radiation
or eelctron ccapture of the nuc ??
Yes, but those happen for a *radioactive*
isotope. You seem to postulate that beta
emission and electron capture are occurring
in every case.
Hadrond are changing their charge by electron
emmition or capture
and you do0nt know where and when
and in waht time point it happence
iow
youi dont realy can flow the elctric charge situation
"flow" stands for "follow", I suppose.
during a long time for any single Atom
may be you can do it in a gross way
by statistica; data
but not in a single Atom along time scale
and it becomes more doninant
as the Atom becomes heavier !!!
But if you (as you said) accept (1),
you must conclude that those
charge fluctuations add up to zero,
and not statistically, in every tiniest
time interval.
So, as long as we are in the conditions of (2)
the electric charge of of the nucleous is a
*constant*. In such cases that constant
strongly affects both physical and chemical
properties of the atoms, at the point that you
can virtually attach to each atom as specified
in (2) a label like 'trademark', 'copyright', or so :).
That's why Nickel isn't Cobalt or Copper.
Or Gold isn't Platinum or Mercury.
Perhaps you would realize that all the above reasoning
applies equally to both light and heavy nuclei
not all chamists are aware of
nuclear proccesses.....
Maybe, but a bit irrelevant.
ATB
Y>Porat
---------------------------------
Ciao, Angelo
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Penrose" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 03:20:52 PM |
|
|
On Sep 24, 11:13 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Some accelerator mass specs use 9 million volts and a thin carbon film
to strip nuclei, presumably completely (since they go on to do mass
separation on them.) So there you have an upper value to your 54th
ionization constant.
Dangerous Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 07:43:18 PM |
|
|
On Sep 25, 4:20 pm, Bill Penrose <penr...@iit.edu> wrote:
On Sep 24, 11:13 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Some accelerator mass specs use 9 million volts and a thin carbon film
to strip nuclei, presumably completely (since they go on to do mass
separation on them.) So there you have an upper value to your 54th
ionization constant.
Dangerous Bill
If you mean "mass spectrometry" then they are very definitely not
fully ionized. The degree of ionization used is very minimal as with
ion engines.
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Penrose" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 10:18:22 PM |
|
|
On Sep 25, 4:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If you mean "mass spectrometry" then they are very definitely not
fully ionized. The degree of ionization used is very minimal as with
ion engines.
I see that you are right:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerator_mass_spectrometry
DB
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sabella" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
25 Sep 2007 03:22:47 AM |
|
|
Robert Clark <rgregoryclark@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
have you looked in the NIST Atomic Spectra Database Levels yet?
http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD/levels_form.html
enter Xe 53 to get the last (54th) electron ionization energy
(41,299.7042eV) etc.
or you could also try:
http://www.camdb.ac.cn/e/ionization_potential/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
26 Sep 2007 01:42:38 PM |
|
|
On Sep 25, 4:22 am, sabella <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
have you looked in the NIST Atomic Spectra Database Levels yet?http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD/levels_form.html
enter Xe 53 to get the last (54th) electron ionization energy
(41,299.7042eV) etc.
or you could also try:http://www.camdb.ac.cn/e/ionization_potential/
Thanks. That first link gave me what I was looking for.
I'm a little confused by the notation used on the site. If I want to
look at neutral xenon, I type in "Xe 0", right? But it displays the
answer as Xe I.
And if I type in "Xe 1" to get Xe1+ , the answer is displayed as Xe
II.
Is this a common notation to indicate the degree of ionization by a
roman numeral that is 1 more than the number of electrons stripped
off?
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Odysseus" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
29 Sep 2007 03:36:25 PM |
|
|
In article <1190832158.881007.169210@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Clark <rgregoryclark@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
Is this a common notation to indicate the degree of ionization by a
roman numeral that is 1 more than the number of electrons stripped
off?
Yes: for a couple of well-known examples, the characteristic emission of
"H-II regions" comes from H+ ions (free protons), and the spectral lines
once attributed to "nebulium" are those of O-III, doubly ionized oxygen.
--
Odysseus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
26 Sep 2007 10:39:01 PM |
|
|
On Sep 26, 8:42 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sep 25, 4:22 am, sabella <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
have you looked in the NIST Atomic Spectra Database Levels yet?http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD/levels_form.html
enter Xe 53 to get the last (54th) electron ionization energy
(41,299.7042eV) etc.
or you could also try:http://www.camdb.ac.cn/e/ionization_potential/
Thanks. That first link gave me what I was looking for.
I'm a little confused by the notation used on the site. If I want to
look at neutral xenon, I type in "Xe 0", right? But it displays the
answer as Xe I.
And if I type in "Xe 1" to get Xe1+ , the answer is displayed as Xe
II.
Is this a common notation to indicate the degree of ionization by a
roman numeral that is 1 more than the number of electrons stripped
off?
Bob Clark- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
------------------
Robert
dont hurry in your thanks givings!!
**it is fiddling of partial data **
they have to show you
all the 54 electrons
one by one separately
and all laong the sum up---
and all of them one by one measured experimentally
2
they have to show you that an attempt was done
to extract*(* more than 54--- and that attempt failed **!!
ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chip" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
04 Oct 2007 12:08:45 PM |
|
|
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
On Sep 25, 4:22 am, sabella <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Bob Clark
have you looked in the NIST Atomic Spectra Database Levels yet?http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD/levels_form.html
enter Xe 53 to get the last (54th) electron ionization energy
(41,299.7042eV) etc.
or you could also try:http://www.camdb.ac.cn/e/ionization_potential/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
04 Oct 2007 01:43:24 PM |
|
|
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.
http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
07 Oct 2007 12:15:38 PM |
|
|
On Oct 4, 8:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark
------------
just find out if that
'fully ionized elements'
icludes Lead with 82 protons (82 positive charges)
and not 83 though there was an attempt to find such !!....
and kepp on being satisfied and happy withit
to the rest of your life !!....
(i think soemone called it
a paradize of fools ....)..
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chip" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
07 Oct 2007 04:25:18 PM |
|
|
Small world! In reading this link, I realized it is somewhat related
to work my doctoral advisor (the late Ben Freiser) published in the
1970's. Ben observed Ar2+ and Ar3+ when Ar+ was trapped in a high-
current, low energy electron beam (energies below the second and third
ionization potentials of Ar).
We didn't think too much of it at the time -- we were chemists, not
physicists. I extended the electron collisions to a technique for
fragmenting polyatomic ions and it became a technique called
"EIEIO" (Electron Impact Excitation of Ions from Organics), but EIEIO
never became a practical technique.
In any case --- it's a reminder of things past to see the EBIT
technique.
Chip
On Oct 4, 2:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
07 Oct 2007 11:29:33 PM |
|
|
On Oct 7, 11:25 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Small world! In reading this link, I realized it is somewhat related
to work my doctoral advisor (the late Ben Freiser) published in the
1970's. Ben observed Ar2+ and Ar3+ when Ar+ was trapped in a high-
current, low energy electron beam (energies below the second and third
ionization potentials of Ar).
We didn't think too much of it at the time -- we were chemists, not
physicists. I extended the electron collisions to a technique for
fragmenting polyatomic ions and it became a technique called
"EIEIO" (Electron Impact Excitation of Ions from Organics), but EIEIO
never became a practical technique.
In any case --- it's a reminder of things past to see the EBIT
technique.
Chip
On Oct 4, 2:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------------
and how far is Xe +3
from Xe +54 ?????!!!!!!
(may be as far as armchair fantasy ---from reality ??)
Y.Porat
-------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chip" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
08 Oct 2007 07:44:31 AM |
|
|
I'll exit this discussion after this because the answer has already
been posted, but if you look at the link Bob Clark posted earlier in
this discussion,
the EBIT device at LLNL can produce fully ionization up to U92+:
http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
using an electron beam ion trap similar to, but with MUCH higher
electron currents and energies than available in our old ion cyclotron
resonance mass spectrometer in grad school.
Chip
On Oct 8, 12:29 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 7, 11:25 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Small world! In reading this link, I realized it is somewhat related
to work my doctoral advisor (the late Ben Freiser) published in the
1970's. Ben observed Ar2+ and Ar3+ when Ar+ was trapped in a high-
current, low energy electron beam (energies below the second and third
ionization potentials of Ar).
We didn't think too much of it at the time -- we were chemists, not
physicists. I extended the electron collisions to a technique for
fragmenting polyatomic ions and it became a technique called
"EIEIO" (Electron Impact Excitation of Ions from Organics), but EIEIO
never became a practical technique.
In any case --- it's a reminder of things past to see the EBIT
technique.
Chip
On Oct 4, 2:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------------
and how far is Xe +3
from Xe +54 ?????!!!!!!
(may be as far as armchair fantasy ---from reality ??)
Y.Porat
-------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
08 Oct 2007 12:17:17 PM |
|
|
On Oct 8, 2:44 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
I'll exit this discussion after this because the answer has already
been posted, but if you look at the link Bob Clark posted earlier in
this discussion,
the EBIT device at LLNL can produce fully ionization up to U92+:
http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
using an electron beam ion trap similar to, but with MUCH higher
electron currents and energies than available in our old ion cyclotron
resonance mass spectrometer in grad school.
Chip
On Oct 8, 12:29 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 7, 11:25 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Small world! In reading this link, I realized it is somewhat related
to work my doctoral advisor (the late Ben Freiser) published in the
1970's. Ben observed Ar2+ and Ar3+ when Ar+ was trapped in a high-
current, low energy electron beam (energies below the second and third
ionization potentials of Ar).
We didn't think too much of it at the time -- we were chemists, not
physicists. I extended the electron collisions to a technique for
fragmenting polyatomic ions and it became a technique called
"EIEIO" (Electron Impact Excitation of Ions from Organics), but EIEIO
never became a practical technique.
In any case --- it's a reminder of things past to see the EBIT
technique.
Chip
On Oct 4, 2:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------------
and how far is Xe +3
from Xe +54 ?????!!!!!!
(may be as far as armchair fantasy ---from reality ??)
Y.Porat
-------------------------- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------------
it seesm that you are daeaf or blind:
i was asking
was it ever tryed to extract fron U
83 eelctrons -- and it failed ??
2
the 82 that you claime to be extarcted
*was it from asingle Atom
or was it from a bigger sample *
do you get the meaning of that question ??
if it from a bigger sample than just one individual
THE RESULT IS A ASTATISTICAL RESULT !!
so if it is an avrage of 92
it is an imediate refutal of the paradigm!!
right ?? got it ??
if not yet:
if it is an avrage
it means thatit is an avrage of **more than 92
and LESS THAN 92 electrons*!!!
mor ethan 92 is an imediate refutal of the paradigm !
so please bring evidence
that is answering my **unprecedented question**
because we already know the parroting answers !!
ps
and if you what to leave while you are pushed to the corner
welcome ......you are not the only one who quit
while pushed to the corner .....
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
08 Oct 2007 11:25:18 PM |
|
|
On Oct 8, 7:17 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 8, 2:44 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
I'll exit this discussion after this because the answer has already
been posted, but if you look at the link Bob Clark posted earlier in
this discussion,
the EBIT device at LLNL can produce fully ionization up to U92+:
http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
using an electron beam ion trap similar to, but with MUCH higher
electron currents and energies than available in our old ion cyclotron
resonance mass spectrometer in grad school.
Chip
On Oct 8, 12:29 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 7, 11:25 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Small world! In reading this link, I realized it is somewhat related
to work my doctoral advisor (the late Ben Freiser) published in the
1970's. Ben observed Ar2+ and Ar3+ when Ar+ was trapped in a high-
current, low energy electron beam (energies below the second and third
ionization potentials of Ar).
We didn't think too much of it at the time -- we were chemists, not
physicists. I extended the electron collisions to a technique for
fragmenting polyatomic ions and it became a technique called
"EIEIO" (Electron Impact Excitation of Ions from Organics), but EIEIO
never became a practical technique.
In any case --- it's a reminder of things past to see the EBIT
technique.
Chip
On Oct 4, 2:43 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 4, 1:08 pm, Chip <c...@jeol.com> wrote:
Xe is not fully ionized in this paper, but
Beebe et. al. Review of Scientific Instruments -- February 1998 --
Volume 69, Issue 2, pp. 640-642
describes generation of some highly charged species including Ar16+,
Xe26+, Tl41+ at Brookhaven. A look at any of the related papers from
this group will give you the current state of the art in generating
highly ionized species.
Chip Cody
Thanks for the reference. After a web search I found there there are
table top instruments available for producing and storing fully
ionized elements, even all the way up to uranium:
Highly Ionized Plasmas.http://www.llnl.gov/str/Schneider.html
Bob Clark- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-----------------------
and how far is Xe +3
from Xe +54 ?????!!!!!!
(may be as far as armchair fantasy ---from reality ??)
Y.Porat
-------------------------- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------------
it seesm that you are daeaf or blind:
i was asking
was it ever tryed to extract fron U
83 eelctrons -- and it failed ??
2
the 82 that you claime to be extarcted
*was it from asingle Atom
or was it from a bigger sample *
do you get the meaning of that question ??
if it from a bigger sample than just one individual
THE RESULT IS A ASTATISTICAL RESULT !!
so if it is an avrage of 92
it is an imediate refutal of the paradigm!!
right ?? got it ??
if not yet:
if it is an avrage
it means thatit is an avrage of **more than 92
and LESS THAN 92 electrons*!!!
mor ethan 92 is an imediate refutal of the paradigm !
so please bring evidence
that is answering my **unprecedented question**
because we already know the parroting answers !!
ps
and if you what to leave while you are pushed to the corner
welcome ......you are not the only one who quit
while pushed to the corner .....
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
-------------------------------------
and here is a quote from your 'quote':
quote:
The original EBIT had a peak electron-beam energy of about 30
kiloelectronvolts, enough to make uranium ions with the same number of
electrons as neon (U82+). The Super-EBIT can achieve an electron beam
energy of 220 kiloelectronvolts, enough to make bare uranium (U92+).
Uranium has the highest atomic number among the naturally occurring
elements, and therefore, Super-EBIT is sufficiently powerful to serve
as the ion source for all of these elements.
Once the highly charged ions are created in EBIT, they are extracted
to RETRAP, where they are cooled, stored, and studied. (One of several
types of ion traps, the Penning trap uses static electric and magnetic
fields to hold the ions.) RETRAP allows researchers to control the
temperature and the relative position of the ions. In particular, it
allows cooling the ions (reducing their kinetic energy by slowing down
their random motion) to the near-zero temperatures needed to create
strongly coupled, crystallized plasmas.2
The cooling is accomplished in a two-step cooling scheme developed at
Lawrence Livermore. (See the figure below.) First, the cloud of light,
singly charged beryllium ions (Be+) in the ion trap is illuminated
with laser beams whose frequency has been selected so that only those
ions moving away from the beam absorb the laser light. As the ions
reemit the light in a random direction and return to their ground
state, they (on average) lose kinetic energy. The process cools the
ion cloud to temperatures of a few kelvins. Highly charged xenon ions
(Xe44+) are extracted from EBIT and moved to the RETRAP. The beryllium
ions, which continue to be cooled by the laser, sympathetically cool
the xenon ions, slowing them down. The temperature (energy) of the
xenon ions drops until both ion species come to a thermal equilibrium,
which takes about 20 seconds. As the temperature of the mixture drops
to about 9 kelvins, the mixed plasma splits, with the highly charged
xenon ions making up a microplasma trapped in the center of a
surrounding cloud of low-charged beryllium ions. (The xenon ion cloud
is nonfluorescing and therefore cannot be seen.) The research team has
trapped microplasmas for as long as 1,000 seconds.
The densities of the microplasmas created with EBIT and RETRAP reach
about 100 million (108) ions per cubic centimeter, with the distance
between the ions being a few micrometers. (Normal, room-temperature
liquids and solids have densities of about 1023 atoms per cubic
centimeter and distances between atoms of a few nanometers.)
end of quote
-------------------------
thereis nothing in that quote that deales with
SINGLE ions!!!!
so as o saied
it is a wonderful case to REFUTE the paradigm
of 92 for U
or 82 for Lead
because
a
it is a very course treatment
and b
deals obviously with samples of many Atoms
and if it is an avrage of 92 or 82 etc
there are more than 92 and less than 92
in U
and more than 92 is an IMMEDIATE refutal
of the partadigm!
so one as usual has to read carefully
wHat he is reading and INTERPRETING!!
ATB
Y.Porat
--------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Ionization energy to fully ionize Xenon? |
24 Sep 2007 02:23:05 PM |
|
|
Robert Clark wrote:
I'm looking for how much energy it would take to *fully* ionize
xenon. I can find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, ionization energy in several
sources, for example here:
Ionization energies of the elements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_energies_of_the_elements
However, the neutral xenon atom has 54 electrons, so the list should
go up to 54, right? But I've never seen anything other than up to only
the 3rd ionization energy for xenon.
Have the higher ones not been measured?
Look up "charge stripping" for naked nucleus injection into
accelerators. If you are stooopid without a computer you are still
stooopid with one.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
THE DIVINE DRUDGING DROUGHT BEARING FULLY ON AUSTRALIA NOW
*****-fuckers, the potter between the kind plain is the pumpkin that orders fully, Sweet Clown.
Startling amounts of stored energy in fully ionized plasmas.
Tesco launches first fully automated recycling machine
Fully discretized physics, my discrete damped oscillator
Lesbian Dikes Eat *****, bill pulls, then Yvette fully departs a light dose for Al's summer, English Child.
Re: You pull wet balls against the pathetic tired window, whilst Janet fully walks them too.
9/11 Fairy Tale Collapses Fully
| Air Ionization using UltraSound
He-3 Ionization chambers
Ionization potentials of all isotopes Table
Positioning of gas using air ionization
Ionization optimization
New SI GUESS, iNTRiNSiC REST energy, eM ..frame-of-reference: 1. Equivalent iNTRiNSiC TEST REST mass, cavity (n) = mD / m1. 2. Energy, eK is the photo-electric effect ionization energy. 3. Let eM equal PROTON mass, mp ..to see 3 QUARK definitions. Th
General equation for ionization potential of the last remaining electron on any atom
|
|
|
