Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userWhy Does Ice Float? Not So Complicated
67
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Chang Q Sun
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The segmental specific heat ratio of the couple hydrogen bond defines not only the phase of Vapor, Liquid, Ice I and XI phase with a quasisolid phase that shows the negative thermal extensibility but uniquely the slope of density of water ice in different phases. Ice floats because H-O contracts less than O:H expands in the QS phase at cooling.
rate research
Read More
We investigate the structural similarities between liquid water and 53 ices, including 20 knowncrystalline phases. We base such similarity comparison on the local environments that consist of atoms within a certain cutoff radius of a central atom. We reveal that liquid water explores the localenvironments of the diverse ice phases, by directly comparing the environments in these phases using general atomic descriptors, and also by demonstrating that a machine-learning potential trained on liquid water alone can predict the densities, the lattice energies, and vibrational properties of theices. The finding that the local environments characterising the different ice phases are found in water sheds light on water phase behaviors, and rationalizes the transferability of water models between different phases.
We discuss the prospects for enhancing absorption and scattering of light from a weakly coupled atom in a high-finesse optical cavity by adding a medium with large, positive group index of refraction. The slow-light effect is known to narrow the cavity transmission spectrum and increase the photon lifetime, but the quality factor of the cavity may not be increased in a metrologically useful sense. Specifically, detection of the weakly coupled atom through either cavity ringdown measurements or the Purcell effect fails to improve with the addition of material slow light. A single-atom model of the dispersive medium helps elucidate why this is the case.
Protective measurement refers to two related schemes for finding the expectation value of an observable without disturbing the state of a quantum system, given a single copy of the system that is subject to a protecting operation. There have been several claims that these schemes support interpreting the quantum state as an objective property of a single quantum system. Here we provide three counter-arguments, each of which we present in t
Singlet fission is a process whereby two triplet excitons can be produced from one photon, potentially increasing the efficiency of photovoltaic devices. Endothermic singlet fission is desired for maximum energy conversion efficiency, and such systems have been shown to form an excimer-like state with multi-excitonic character prior to the appearance of triplets. However, the role of the excimer as an intermediate has, until now, been unclear. Here we show, using 5,12-bis((triisopropylsilyl)ethynyl)tetracene in solution as a prototypical example, that, rather than acting as an intermediate, the excimer serves to trap excited states, to the detriment of singlet fission yield. We clearly demonstrate that singlet fission and its conjugate process, triplet-triplet annihilation, occur at a longer intermolecular distance than an excimer intermediate would impute. These results establish that an endothermic singlet fission material must be designed that avoids excimer formation, thus allowing singlet fission to reach its full potential in enhancing photovoltaic energy conversion.
In recent years philosophers of science have explored categorical equivalence as a promising criterion for when two (physical) theories are equivalent. On the one hand, philosophers have presented several examples of theories whose relationships seem to be clarified using these categorical methods. On the other hand, philosophers and logicians have studied the relationships, particularly in the first order case, between categorical equivalence and other notions of equivalence of theories, including definitional equivalence and generalized definitional (aka Morita) equivalence. In this article, I will express some skepticism about this approach, both on technical grounds and conceptual ones. I will argue that category structure (alone) likely does not capture the structure of a theory, and discuss some recent work in light of this claim.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
