Re: IONS in metals

["Bob Sciamanda" <trebor@velocity.net>]

The following is a re-posting of a Sat 9/26 post (lost):
************************************************************

The forces are electrostatic, but they are not Maxwellian.  They know
about the Pauli exclusion principle and the rest of Quantum
Electrodynamics.

Bob Sciamanda
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (ret)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor
-----Original Message-----
From: Ludwik Kowalski <KowalskiL@Mail.Montclair.edu>
To: phys-L@atlantis.uwf.edu <phys-L@atlantis.uwf.edu>
Date: Saturday, September 26, 1998 2:15 PM
Subject: IONS in metals


> Bob Sciamanda wrote:
>
> >   I don't think the "ultimate" question is answerable within
> >   Maxwellian electrodynamics.  Recall Earnshaw's theorem.
>
> I am not sure but I think that Bob is referring  to a mathematical
> proof that "electric forces alone can not produce a confined stable
> configuration of charges". Can somebody quote the theoreme as
> it is actually stated?
>
> Consider an electrified metallic sphere. Charges are distributed
> over the surface. The configuration is stable. What non-electric
> forces play a significant role in confining charges in this case?
> Textbooks often say that forces in our environment are either
> electric (ultimately) or gravitational? What forces are resposible
> for the "work function" in metals?
>
> I am assuming it is OK to call electrons ions; separating
> electrons from neutral atoms (ionization) creates two ions.
>
>                                                              Ludwik
> Kowalski


Bob Sciamanda
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (ret)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor