Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
I think, therefore I am thinking.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register. Please log in or create an account.

AFM tip more sensitive than a single atom

as amorphous elemental materials Cr as well as Zn may "have" the same density Thus just one Zn atom at the tip of a Cr AFM tip has higher resolution as e- perturbations are particular to that atoms quantum states
  (+1, -4)
(+1, -4)
  [vote for,

sometimes a pile of atoms looks like a bunch of round things Chemists note these form ordered structures Thus a Face centered cubic arrangement has a different density than a body centered cubic arrangement

If we ignore that arranging to just look at amorphous density then we find some elements have equal densities Zn as well as Cr have density 7.14

thus whatever the actual preferred crystal form of a Zn or Cr crystal is if we put just one Zn or Cr atom at the tip or side of an ordered crystal made of the different element then all of the reacting that atom does will be from Nucleus charge rather than actual atomic radius difference.

New stuff: Another way of looking at this is a salt crystal with one K atom at the very corner of the cube. The wobble of that K atom, even though NaCl makes up the supporting physical base, is more electrically detectable from background that just a Na on the corner so resolution goes up.

Another approach would be to have an AFM crystal tip with two fingers, one a K atom, the other an Na atom, the electrical change could be looked at as the difference between the two, with, just possibly, the nucleus positivity being the detectable difference. I do not know if there are elements with near complete identicality of one quantum emission band(level) but the identicality of the electron response with the big nuclear mass difference could make a positive energy nucleus based AFM tip that functions at higher resolution.

Then the previous writing: It appears that this gives an AFM tip the ability to view things with higher resolution than an AFM tip of just one element or of a crystallized compound

From a nanotechnological point of view with an amorphous equidistant mass the density is reminiscent of which atoms have an average similar radius yet the actual electronegativity of the atom as well as that atoms quantum conduction areas is what will react to the thing being characterized

rather than a bunch of atoms flexing to modify measured e- its just one atom flexing as the tip nears an object

Now there is a peculiar thing about this: I got my density numbers from wolframalpha so its possible they used a copy of the CRC handbook numbers for say a chunk of Cr with FCC crystals at STP as well as a chunk of Zn with BCC crystals at STP or its possible they calculated amorphous density from AMU times atomic radius

note that atomic radius varies irregularly with atomic mass thus Gallium might actually be more dense than Germanium even though Germanium has more protons plus neutrons; generally if its a liquid near STP like Ga or Br it has a tighter nucleus

My idea works if they did AMU times atomic radius yet they have the densities of things like nitrogen as .0001 with Zn at 7.14 thus I think the densities are a chunk of element at STP

I still think the idea works its just I don't know which elements actually have identical amorphus density from AMU times atomic radius

beanangel, Jun 06 2009

wolframalpha lists elements on density http://www61.wolfra...?i=elements+density
[beanangel, Jun 06 2009]


       Whoa, hold it right there, Beany. Which edition of CRC are you using? You know about the restandardization issue, yes? And have allowed for that?   

       Also, in case you hadn't considered it, you'll be reminded of the shell factor in relation to small numbers of atoms which don't follow Cole's Law.   

       The point is, all this was done back in the 60's (theoretically) and the 80's (for real). But you knew that, didn't you?
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 06 2009

       Another possibility to create a higher resolution AFM tip I wonder if anyone has made an AFM yet where a laser tuned to the band gap of the tip atom(s) enegizes the tip a few billion times per s then the tip phosphoresces of fluoresces These quantum effects might vary with nearness to another atom as compounds have varying phospherescence as well as fluorescence   

       I feel like that is saying adjustable quantum dot as AFM tip   

       compounds are different than afm tip near an atom yet they detect atoms with overlapping orbitals that is to say spatial variations on e-
beanangel, Jun 06 2009

       If you want something smaller than regular atoms, use one of those shrunken blacklight atoms.
ldischler, Jun 07 2009

       // the tip phosphoresces of fluoresces// You lost me and all people of sound mind at that point. I'm voting [-] because it pisses me off when you don't take the trouble to be coherent - it's just intellectual masturbation unless you make the effort to share it with other people.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 07 2009

       // then the tip phosphoresces [or] fluoresces // This part sounds original...but I'm uninformed; one more thing to Google sometime   

       [] due to lack of full stops and excessive intellectual turbidity
sninctown, Jun 07 2009

       This won't work at all, as it will cause the sub-etha nullification of any ordered structure to which it applies. Besides, the flexure coefficient will cause unintended wave crossover deformities in the field. It will also break the kinibbling pin, get your daughter pregnant, and give your dog mange.
nomocrow, Jun 08 2009

       I feel like that atom will wear off soon.
notexactly, Jun 14 2019


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle