Issue 42, 2010

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

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

Supplementary files

Article information

Article type
Comment
Submitted
22 Jan 2010
Accepted
21 Aug 2010
First published
23 Sep 2010

Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2010,12, 14362-14363

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

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content.

Social activity

Spotlight

Advertisements