Horace writes: >Not sure what you mean here. There was no "x 1000" notation used that I >saw. It is strange that Cals. is capitalized though. You don't suppose >this capitalization is intended to mean dietary calories, i.e. >kilocalories? This seems inappropriate for a thermodynamic study.
Yes, that is exactly my point, Cal is different from cal. Not that a typesetter would know that, and I just read the capital letter and multiplied by 1000 ( as did everyone else here, included some of the authors of those ref's we were passing around ). This is my favorite example of confusing physics nomenclature, BTW. Better even than gravitomagnetics which has nothing to do with magnetism (grin). It look like from reading the morning mail that Fred may have found better refs with the correct value, which ( using your superior nomenclature ) puts it at 1/10th eV/atom. >I notice a number of references question the existence of actual Sb >allotropes. The electrochmically deposited stuff may be just a mixture of >Sb, SbCl3, SbO, and H or H2, etc., assuming not all the SBO+ is reduced, >and some of the SbCl3 or some related and similar ion stays in solution. >The H and SbO (or some similar compounds) would have to be physically >separated in the amorphous black mixture, but a "rubbing" would bring them >in contact and start the explosion. Yeah, I started to get into this last night, is the exothermic reaction from the phase change, the coming out of solid solution of the halide, or both??? You feel that H may be part of the reaction, but I think we could make the stuff with very little H by using low voltages or simply going to a nonaqueous solution ( fred found a patent using glycol, I'm partial to acetone ). K.
