2002
DOI: 10.1023/a:1020614010528
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Untitled

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
39
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
39
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This difference in electrostatic potential, termed the interfacial potential, results from a net orientation of dipole moments (both permanent and induced for all solution components) in addition to a quadrupole moment contribution (permanent and induced) arising from the distribution, orientation and density of water molecular quadrupole moments. While this property is conveniently accessible in simulation, consensus experimental estimates of the interfacial potential (even for pure water) remain in dispute and include both positive and negative values that span an approximate ±1500 mV range around zero (see references 97 and 98 and the references contained therein). In contrast, a number of recent theoretical determinations of the inter facial potential of water derived from molecular dynamics simulations employing a variety of water models and simulation protocols typically report consistent values on the order of -400 to -600 mV (discussed below).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This difference in electrostatic potential, termed the interfacial potential, results from a net orientation of dipole moments (both permanent and induced for all solution components) in addition to a quadrupole moment contribution (permanent and induced) arising from the distribution, orientation and density of water molecular quadrupole moments. While this property is conveniently accessible in simulation, consensus experimental estimates of the interfacial potential (even for pure water) remain in dispute and include both positive and negative values that span an approximate ±1500 mV range around zero (see references 97 and 98 and the references contained therein). In contrast, a number of recent theoretical determinations of the inter facial potential of water derived from molecular dynamics simulations employing a variety of water models and simulation protocols typically report consistent values on the order of -400 to -600 mV (discussed below).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1). This is explained by the difference of physicochemical and electrochemical properties of the bulk (vol ume) and the surface of solution [5][6][7][8][9][10] that are directly related to the structural peculiarities of water as a sol vent [11,12].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In spite of a great body of information on the surface potential of water accumulated to date, the sign and numerical value of this parameter is still debat able. The χ(H 2 O) values reported by different authors vary from -1.1 to +0.5 V. 3 Analysis of these data suggests that the surface poten tial of water equal to +0.10 V seems to be the best ap proximation at the moment. The positive sign of this pa rameter is substantiated by the fact that the negative ends of water dipoles are oriented toward the gas phase while their positive ends are oriented toward the liquid phase.…”
Section: The Surface Potentials Of Water and Nonaqueous Solventsmentioning
confidence: 88%