What materials have high, mid-range, and low electron affinity and conductivity?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around identifying materials based on their electron affinity and conductivity. Participants emphasize the need for clear definitions of terms like "high," "good," "poor," and "mid-range" to facilitate accurate comparisons. One contributor highlights the ambiguity in the original request, questioning how to assess these properties without specific values. Another provides an example comparing silicone rubber to aluminum to illustrate relative properties. The conversation underscores the importance of context when discussing material properties.
Archosaur
Messages
333
Reaction score
4
Can anyone name for me:

a] a material that has a HIGH electron affinity and is a GOOD conductor of electricity.

b] a material that has a MID-RANGE electron affinity and is a POOR conductor of electricity.

c] a material that has a LOW electron affinity and is a GOOD conductor of electricity.

Bonus points if you can guess what I'm going to do with these materials.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These properties are VAGUE!

What do you mean by "high", "good", "poor", "low", and "midrange"? If you do not specify range of values, your "good" could easily be my "poor".

Zz.
 
ZapperZ said:
What do you mean by "high", "good", "poor", "low", and "midrange"?

I mean relative to each other.

Sorry for assuming you could have inferred that.
 
Archosaur said:
I mean relative to each other.

Sorry for assuming you could have inferred that.

Er.. how is that clear?

For example, look at your first criteria:

a material that has a HIGH electron affinity and is a GOOD conductor of electricity.

What am I comparing here if I'm doing this "relative to each other"? If I'm opening up the CRC Handbook, what am I comparing?

Zz.
 
I would say that relative to aluminum, silicone rubber has a high electron affinity and is a poor conductor.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top