Jump to main content
Jump to site search

Issue 42, 2010
Previous Article Next Article

Comment on “An explanation for the charge on water's surface” by A. Gray-Weale and J. K. Beattie, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2009, 11, 10994

Author affiliations

Abstract

Gray-Weale and Beattie’s rationalization of the negative charge observed on the surface of water in terms of accumulation of OH is based on the supposedly uniquely large dielectric decrement of hydroxide solutions [A. Gray-Weale and J. K. Beattie, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2009, 11, 10994]. We challenge this rationalization and point to another ion, namely fluoride, which has a comparable dielectric decrement and size and which is repelled from the surface of water.

Graphical abstract: Comment on “An explanation for the charge on water's surface” by A. Gray-Weale and J. K. Beattie, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2009, 11, 10994

Back to tab navigation

Supplementary files

Publication details

The article was received on 22 Jan 2010, accepted on 21 Aug 2010 and first published on 23 Sep 2010


Article type: Comment
DOI: 10.1039/C001492C
Citation: Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2010,12, 14362-14363
  •   Request permissions

    Comment on “An explanation for the charge on water's surface” by A. Gray-Weale and J. K. Beattie, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2009, 11, 10994

    R. Vácha, D. Horinek, R. Buchner, B. Winter and P. Jungwirth, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2010, 12, 14362
    DOI: 10.1039/C001492C

Search articles by author

Spotlight

Advertisements