As i know, the metallic structure for example a pure copper metal

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of metallic bonding, specifically in pure copper, where metallic bonding occurs due to the electrostatic attraction between positively charged metal cations and delocalized electrons. The formation of an electron cloud in metals is attributed to the energy dynamics that allow electrons to move freely between atoms, unlike in semiconductors and insulators where electrons are more tightly bound. When an electric field is applied, these delocalized electrons move in a specific direction, constituting an electric current. The conversation emphasizes that the energy required for electron movement is crucial, as it involves both force and displacement. Overall, the properties of metals, including high thermal and electrical conductivity, stem from their unique atomic structure and bonding characteristics.
Yh Hoo
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
As i know, the metallic structure for example a pure copper metal which is made up of all metal atoms that is the copper atoms actually have all its atom of metallic element bonded together by metallic bonding. Metallic bonding is the electrostatic force of attraction between the positively charged metal cations and the delocalized electrons that contribute to the negatively charged electrons cloud right?? (as in my picture)

My Question is why electrons cloud is formed in metallic structure only instead of semiconductor and insulator ??

And when electric field due to the electrical potential difference is created across the metal, is it the delocalized electrons in the electrons sea are made to move in a specific direction and constitute an electric current ??
 

Attachments

  • gif27.met.gif
    gif27.met.gif
    2.3 KB · Views: 498
Engineering news on Phys.org


I think you have your question slightly 'the wrong way round'. If the energy which keeps an outer electron associated with any particular atom is not significantly different from that which attracts it to a nearby atom then the electron can move from atom to atom easily (you used the well known term "de-localised"). For all atoms (or mixtures of atoms) with that energy situation, the bonding will be similar - we refer to it as metallic bonding and we group these elements under the common heading of Metals. It applies to the majority of all elements, in fact.. Also, associated with the highly mobile electrons in metals, is the high thermal and electrical conductivity.
When the atomic structure is different, the mechanical properties will be affected. The atoms of non-metallic elements often combine with co-valent bonding, where two atoms can exist close together and 'share' an electron because, in this condition, the energy is a minimum (hence they stick together). In Ionic Bonding, there is a similar situation in which the lowest energy state is when one atom actually loses one electron and the other gains one - again, the electron in question is tightly associated with just the particular pair of atoms - another potential energy minimum.
So it's not so much a matter of 'Why does it happen in metals?" so much as "what do you call all elements that behave like this?"
 


sophiecentaur said:
If the energy which keeps an outer electron associated with any particular atom is not significantly different from that which attracts it to a nearby atom then the electron can move from atom to atom easily (you used the well known term "de-localised"). For all atoms (or mixtures of atoms) with that energy situation, the bonding will be similar - we refer to it as metallic bonding and we group these elements under the common heading of Metals. It applies to the majority of all elements, in fact.. Also, associated with the highly mobile electrons in metals, is the high thermal and electrical conductivity.

Thanks for your reply,is it the energy (1st bold) u meant refers to the attractive force(coulomb force) between the positively charged nucleus of the atom and the negatively charged electrons in valence shell??
and what is actually meant by the force (2nd bold) ?? attractive force from nucleus of other atoms ??
and can you please explain to me how the electrons cloud is created and moves when an electric field is created ??
Thanks a lot.
 


Actually, it's the energy to move the electron rather than the force that counts. Energy (or work) needed is to do with force AND the distance moved. It may sometimes be just a matter of force but if that force acts over a large displacement, then the energy involved can be very great compared with when the force 'gives up' after a small displacement. So we talk in terms of energy to get the right answer. Sounds nitpicking but very relevant.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...

Similar threads

Back
Top