1990
DOI: 10.1038/346697a0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

All surface and no activity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
2
0
2

Year Published

1991
1991
2002
2002

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Historically, small silicon clusters were first assumed to be simply pieces of the silicon crystal lattice. This notion was soon disproved by the observation of the surprisingly low reactivity of these particles,17 which did not fit the common expectation (small particles have a larger surface area for their volume, and hence are more reactive). In this vein, attempts to construct structures for silicon clusters with similar surface reconstructions as bulk silicon16 also turned out to be a misconception, since this cannot explain their reduced reactivity compared to the bulk.…”
Section: Exemplary Systemsmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Historically, small silicon clusters were first assumed to be simply pieces of the silicon crystal lattice. This notion was soon disproved by the observation of the surprisingly low reactivity of these particles,17 which did not fit the common expectation (small particles have a larger surface area for their volume, and hence are more reactive). In this vein, attempts to construct structures for silicon clusters with similar surface reconstructions as bulk silicon16 also turned out to be a misconception, since this cannot explain their reduced reactivity compared to the bulk.…”
Section: Exemplary Systemsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It is tempting to ascribe the structural differences between clusters and the solid state to the dominance of surface effects, but this is rather vague and unconstructive; in fact, attempts in this direction can even be misleading, for example in attempts to understand the structures of silicon clusters 16, 17. Instead, we want to recall an argument that has been present in the literature for a long time (see Nelson and Spaepen18 and the historical references listed there): Imagine a species of atoms interacting like hard spheres or by a somewhat more realistic pair potential (such as the Lennard–Jones (LJ) potential, see Section 3.1; all the abbreviations used are given in Table 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Zunächst war man der Auffassung, kleine Siliciumcluster seien einfach Ausschnitte der Siliciumkristallstruktur. Dies wurde jedoch bald durch die verblüffend niedrige Reaktivität kleiner Siliciumcluster widerlegt,17 die so gar nicht der üblichen Regel (kleinere Teilchen haben eine größere Oberfläche und sind deshalb reaktiver) entsprach. Daher sind Versuche, Strukturen für Siliciumcluster zu konstruieren, deren Oberfläche ähnliche Umordnungseffekte zeigt wie die Festkörperoberfläche,16 konzeptionell verfehlt, da damit die gegenüber dem Festkörper deutlich erniedrigte Reaktivität nicht erklärt werden kann.…”
Section: Exemplarische Systemeunclassified
“…Als eine erste Begründung der These könnte man die Dominanz von Oberflächeneffekten bei kleinen Clustern anführen. Dies ist jedoch wenig konkret und konstruktiv; tatsächlich scheiterten Versuche, auf diese Art die Strukturen von Siliciumclustern zu verstehen 16, 17. Stattdessen sei an einen anderen Gedanken erinnert, der seit langem in der Literatur präsent ist (siehe etwa Nelson und Spaepen18 und die von ihnen aufgeführten historischen Zitate): Man stelle sich harte Kugeln oder auch mit einem einfachen Paarpotential (wie dem LJ‐Potential, siehe Abschnitt 3.1; alle verwendeten Abkürzungen sind in Tabelle 1 zusammengestellt) wechselwirkende Atome vor.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified