Terry Chamberlin wrote: > Marshall, you said, > The H2O2 reacts with the silver particles, producing > ionic silver > The final result is a mixture of ionic silver > (hydroxide and oxide) and very small colloidal > particles. If your CS has a large particle content, > and overall exceeds some minimum level (something over > 26 ppm), then when the large particles are converted > to ionic, the ionic content can exceed the solubility > of silver oxide/hydroxide, and will produce a brown > sediment. > If you have mostly ionic in which you already have > brown suspension of the ionic precipitant, then that > will be converted to 2 atom colloid, reducing the > ionic content to under the solubility limit, and it > all then dissolves and goes clear. > Lets assume that after adding H2O2 you end up with > 33% particle, and 67% ionic > What this basically says is that it does not matter > what the initial ionic vs particle content of the > batch is > > These sentences are confusing. The H2O2 reacts with > the silver particles, producing ionic silver It was > ALL ionic from the beginning. Every silver particle > had a charge.
That is not true. The correct definition of an ion is at http://www.iupac.org/goldbook/I03158.pdf and is: An atomic or molecular particle having a net electric charge. EIS is composed of ionic silver, which is typically silver oxide and silver hydroxide and particulate silver which is a silver crystal, and thus is NOT an ion. Using your broad definition of an ion then a balloon that is charged up, and the earth are both ions, which is clearly not the case. > > > The final result is a mixture of ionic silver and > very small colloidal particles. ALL the particles are > ionic. No they are not, only the dissolved compounds are ionic, the colloidal silver crystals are not. > The particles that are too small to be termed colloidal also have a > charge so they too are ionic. I am not sure what you mean by too small, size has nothing to do with if it is a colloid or not. If it has charge and is atomic or molecular, then it is an ion, but if it NOT atomic or molecular, then it is not an ion. In the case of milk the cream is in very small charged droplets, and forms a colloid, but the cream droplets are NOT ions, they are simply charged particles, like a balloon that is charged up. > > What are you attempting to differentiate between? The official definition of an ion. > > > If your CS has a large particle content There is > nothing in the solution but particles. What else could > there be? By particles I am referring to colloidal silver crystals. Yes ions are particles as are the water molecules, but I was not referring to them. > > > ..when the large particles are converted to ionic > The large particles are already ionic, they already > have a charge. > They have a charge, they are not ionic any more than a balloon rubbed on the wall is ionic. > > If you have mostly ionic I dont have MOSTLY ionic, > I have nothing but ionic. Then you have no particulate silver crystals, and there will be NO tyndall. > > > ..that will be converted to 2 atom colloid, reducing > the ionic content So are you saying that some of the > ions will lose their charge? > Yes, the ions lose their ionic charge and become a silver crystal particle. The particle will have a charge though due to other influences. The Ag2++ ion will have a charge of 2, but the Ag crystal particle will have a charge that ranges from 0 to 2, and will be continually varying depending on the dynamics of the liquid and collisions with water molecules. A better example would be a silver particle of say 100 atoms with maybe 20 on the surface. If the silver in it were ionic, it would have a charge of 100 electrons, but being a particle, only the surface can have a charge, and thus it can never have a charge of more than 20. It is pretty easy to tell the ionic from the particulate crystals, both by the tyndall effect, as well as by adding something that "shorts out" charges. Soap will do this, it will discharge static charges, but of course has no effect on the actual charges of ions. If you add soap to EIS then the charge on the silver crystals will lose their charge, and they will begin clumping together, forming larger and larger crystals until they are too large and lack the charge to stay suspended, and then will precipitate out. Soap will have no effect on the ionic portion at all, you cannot simply discharge an ion with a non-ionic substance such as soap. > > Lets assume that after adding H2O2 you end up with > 33% particle, and 67% ionic So you are saying that > 33% will not have a charge, and 67% will? No, I am saying that 33% are crystalline with a static charge, and 67% is atomic or molecular with an ionic charge. > > > What this basically says is that it does not matter > what the initial ionic vs particle content of the > batch is The batch is nothing else but ionic > particles. None of the particles are without a charge. No, normal EIS is composed of both ionic as well as crystalline silver particle. > > > Can you use the same vocabulary that the rest of the > scientific world does, so I can understand what you > are saying? That is what I am doing, you are the one that is ignoring the official definition of what an ion is. Your definition calls the whole earth an ion, which is absurd. If you do not like the official definition of an ion, I suggest you message on the chemistry list, and argue the point with the chemists and scientists that hang out there. They are who pointed me to the official definition, and supported my view that charged balloons, and silver crystals are not ions. If you like go ahead and answer the message I already left there so we can see what the response is from researchers in chemistry. See http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/browse_thread/thread/203c0f1ebbf2cfdf/0c0da6c29fc3a5ac?lnk=st&q=definition+of+an+ion&rnum=1#0c0da6c29fc3a5ac for the present discussion on this topic. Marshall
