What is {001} in reference to the surface of TiO2?

Thread starter TheCarl
Start date Nov 10, 2013
Tags

Reference Surface

AI Thread Summary

The discussion focuses on the {001} surface of anatase TiO2, which refers to a specific crystallographic orientation described by Miller indices. The {001} notation indicates a plane in the crystal structure that is perpendicular to the z-axis in a Cartesian coordinate system. Understanding this surface is crucial for applications in photocatalysis and semiconductor technology. The conversation highlights the importance of crystallography in material science, particularly for those with limited chemistry backgrounds. Clarity on such terminology is essential for effectively engaging with research articles in the field.

Nov 10, 2013

TheCarl

Homework Statement

I am an EE in a research group and we are required to read up on some articles for the project. My chemistry knowledge is not the best so I need some assistance understanding some terminology. The article references the {001} surface of anatase TiO2. Can someone explain what {001} is describing?

Physics news on Phys.org

Nov 11, 2013

Borek

Mentor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_index

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...

View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

View full post »