Talk:Double layer (surface science)

Merging Part I
I propose to merge this article with Electrical double layer under name Electrical double layer. There is a kind of discussion about it, but no clear consensus seen.

Ilya V. Pobelov 20:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

There is a very large bulk of scientific knowledge that is very poorly presented right now. It is called Colloid and Interface Science. There are many thousands of papers and books on this subject. It is linked to Electrochemistry, Biophysics, Nanothechnology etc... It is clear that nobody truly familiar with Colloid Science has contributed to WikipediA. For instance, article on Electrophoresis is written on the level of 100 year ago. Article on Double Layer is written by physicist, who have no idea about Double Layer in real world systems. What I am writing now has been written in dozens of books. It is not my opinion. It has very solid background, theoretical and experimental. This is only beginning. WikipediA requires dozens of more pages on various Electrokinetics effects, Adsorption, Aggregative Stability, ... I suggest that you look at 5 volumes of Lyklema "Fundamentals of Interface and Colloid Science". Page that I created Double Layer (interfacial) is the first one required for this notion. The second one will be Double Layer (electrochemistry). Another one Double Layer (biology). Another one Double Layer (polarized). There might be several more.
 * Before you create any more articles, i suggest you improve the ones you have already created, since, at the moment, they have very little context, by which i mean it is hard for the average person to understand what is being said, whic goes against wikipedia, as the very idea behind it is that anyone can read any article and understand it. Also, your articles are written very much like essays, which could be interpreted as original research unless you reference everything. As they are, your articles are liable to be deleted, please improve them before they are--Jac16888 16:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

OK. I agree. It is fair. I have changed one on Electroacoustic Phenomena. It does have references. Next is on Double Layer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreiDukhin (talk • contribs) 17:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Great. What you've done so far has been much better, however, i would suggest that you simplify the opening section even further, basically making it so that a child could understand the subject, and then use the rest of the article for the advanced stuff. Also, it would be a good idea to remove the wikilinks that don't have an article behind them, as they make the article look messy, and i would consider, if possible, breaking the article up into different sections using ==Insert Heading Here==, this system, with 3 = signs for a sub-section, then 4, etc. Finally, if you and when you create articles for the other double layer articles, you might want to consider making, or have someone else make, a navbox with a link to each, so readers can easy access them all. Thank you--Jac16888 18:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Jac, Thank you very much. I am just learning how to do this. Yes, I will folow you advices. I have created those un-used links for future. I hope to fill all of them within a month. Otherwise I would have to go back and edit every page that have them. Please, be a bit patient. For instance, today I have filled page "surface conductivity". —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreiDukhin (talk • contribs) 15:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Most of the links on this page redirect back to this page. WTF? 130.39.191.105 (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Positive or Negative
If the object is negatively charged, the pinned layer will be positive, and the diffuse layer will ALSO BE POSITIVE. http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/Chemistry/Electrochemis/Electrochemical/ElectricalDouble/ElectricalDouble.htm  76.181.70.43 (talk) 15:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)dan


 * Reads bit strange to me, and I do not quite agree with the explanation given on the link. But you may indeed have a specifically adsorbed layer bearing positive charge. If the magnitude of these two charges is the same, they neutralize each other, and there is no diffuse layer. This situation is called charge neutralization. If the charge of the specifically adsorbed layer is larger in magnitude than the one of the object, than the diffuse layer is indeed positive. This situation is referred to as charge reversal or overcharging, but this happens not too often. Williams12357 (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Merging Part II
Agreed with Jac - any more articles on double layer are useless. Improving the present one would be more than sufficent. Double layer (biospecific) could also be merged here. Williams12357 (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Double layer (interfacial)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Double layer (interfacial)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "conway1": From Supercapacitor:  From Electric double-layer capacitor: See also Brian E. Conway in Electrochemistry Encyclopedia: Electrochemical Capacitors — Their Nature, Function and Applications 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Double layer (surface science). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130820095410/http://electrochem.cwru.edu/encycl/art-p05-pillars-of-ec.htm to http://electrochem.cwru.edu/encycl/art-p05-pillars-of-ec.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Double layer (surface science). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141222044332/http://services.eng.uts.edu.au/cempe/subjects_JGZ/eet/Capstone%20thesis_AN.pdf to http://services.eng.uts.edu.au/cempe/subjects_JGZ/eet/Capstone%20thesis_AN.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Stern Layer - Point Charges or Hard Sphere?
This may be a small point (ha), but so much weight is put on point charges vs hard spheres in school that I think its worth clarifying if possible.

I'm reading (viz. Google Translating) Otto Stern's 1924 paper, and he specifically calls the the Helmholtz delta between the adsorbed layer and the surface the "ionic radius" for his theory, and delta shows up in his equations. "Da aber für die Unsymmetrie der Kurve auch die Verschiedenheit des Ionenradius δ und vor allem der Dielektrizitätskonstanten d der positiven und negativen Ionen eine wesentliche Rolle spielt, während hier d und d für beide Ionen gleich gesetzt würde, soll hierauf in einer späteren Arbeit eingegangen werden."

I'm not sure I see another place where the requirement of a volume or non-zero radius exists in the paper, though again this is all by google translate, but the assertion of Stern's model being specifically a point-charge model to the exclusion of hard sphere or otherwise seems to be in error. But again, I don't read German and my pdf is a scan, not a searchable pdf, so I'm not completely comfortable editing it without confirmation.

Does anyone know more about this? Ehchandlerjr (talk) 21:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)