One way to proof the validity of \(f_{osc}\) and the associated \(I_{osc}=q_e*f_{osc}\) where \(q_e\) is the electron charge, is to pass such a current, \(I_{osc}\), through a metal whose photoelectric threshold frequency cannot be obtained (usually where the expected threshold frequency is at the edge of the producible light spectrum) during the experiment to obtain the threshold frequency.
In another words, repeat the experiment to obtain \(f_{threshold}\) with \(I_{osc}\) following through the metal.
To find where there was none...
Thursday, January 10, 2019
Wednesday, January 9, 2019
I Found The Rabbit Hole
This is being thick skin about why \(f_{osc}\) is not the photoelectric emission threshold frequency.
This line of best fit has gradient\(\rightarrow\infty\) as \(x\rightarrow\infty\). For any such line fitted closer to the origin, it has gradient \(\lt\infty\). "Threshold", the x-intercept of this line is not unique.
This is a line to fit V-I characteristics of a gas discharge tube at the onset of glow discharge,
where \(x=log(I)\). The drop in voltage here is attributed to negative charges created.
This should not be confused with,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
where \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of ejected electrons and \(\Phi=hf_o\) the Work Function defined by \(f_o\), the threshold frequency. This relation answers the question: "What happens to the excess energy of the photon beyond \(\Phi\) after impact?"
Using sodium, \(Na\)
\(f_o=4.39*10^{14}\,Hz\)
If we reverse and find \(a_{\psi}\) using
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\) --- (*)
with a change in notation,
\(f_{hole}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi\,hole}}}\)
\(a_{\psi\,hole}=2\pi\left(\cfrac{c}{f_{hole}}\right)^2=2.93\text{e-}12\,m\)
What is this small hole?
Could it be that \(f_{osc}\) of sodium, opens up this small hole and subsequent photons that falls into it, is split into two parts,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
\(\Phi=hf_{hole}\), \(f\) is the frequency of the impacting photons and \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of the ejected particles. \(f_{osc}\) of sodium is given by,
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi\,Na}}}\)
where \(a_{\psi\,Na}\) is the size of sodium \(\psi\) cloud.
\(f_{osc}\) opens up a hole denoted by \(a_{\psi\,hole}\), and all photons at greater size than \(a_{\psi\,hole}\) (lower frequency than \(f_{hole}\), as indicated by (*)) are rejected by the hole. If this is the role of \(f_{osc}\), then using a narrow bandwidth of photons at \(f_{osc}\) and illuminating the metal with photons at bigger size than \(a_{hole}\) will cause the metal to appear very bright and without the emission of charged particles. All illuminating photons is rejected by the hole opened by \(f_{osc}\).
Photons of size smaller, \(a_{\psi}\lt a_{\psi\,hole}\) falls into the hole. When do such photons return after falling into the hole? What dictates the size of the hole? Hole of different sizes could explain the seemingly different processes that occurs simultaneously during photoelectric emission where two \(K_{max}\) values were noted. The post related to this is "More Fodo Effects" dated 04 Jun 2014; two related diagrams are shown below,
Impurities could explain the two \(K_{max}s\).
\(f_{hole}\) is the threshold frequency. Given \(f_{\psi}\), \(a_{\psi}\) can be derived given,
\(2\pi a_{\psi}=n\lambda=n\cfrac{c}{f_{\psi}}\)
\(f_{\psi}=\cfrac{c}{2\pi a_{\psi}}\), with \(n=1\)
but an impacting photon interact through,
\(f_{\psi}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\)
when \(f_{\psi}\gt f_{hole}\), \(a_{\psi}\lt a_{\psi\,hole}\) and the photon goes through the hole, and its energy is split via,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
\(\Phi=hf_{hole}\) and \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of a emitted particle.
\(f_{osc}\) that triggers \(f_{hole}\) is lower than \(f_{hole}\). \(f_{hole}\) alone does not cause photoelectric emission. \(f_{osc}\), a frequency below the threshold, has first to create the hole, via a mode of oscillation with resonance at,
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\)
where \(a_{\psi}\) is the size of the \(\psi\) ball.
This hole is in effect, a region of negative energy that minus off energy of subsequent impacting photons of higher frequencies. Photons of lower frequencies are too big to fit into the hole. And only the resonance frequency, \(f_{osc}\) opens the hole in the metal.
Besides being convoluted, this explanation does not hold \(a_{\psi\,hole}\) at all, apart from the exertion that \(f_{osc}\) caused it. It however, allows for many size holes that can account for more than one \(K_{max}\) and allows \(f_{osc}\) to be different from the threshold frequency. But charges are still created within the metal at \(f_{osc}\) and, higher frequency photons interacting with the holes created can be outside the metal, ie emitted, when they return from the time dimension.
How does \(f_{osc}\) create charges? \(f_{osc}\) set the \(\psi\) cloud of the atom into resonance and the atom loses its orbiting valence electrons. And, how a photon of higher energy \(f_{\psi}\gt f_{hole}\) ejects a particle of kinetic energy \(K_{max}\) after filling in the hole? The hole requires \(E=hf_{hole}\), what remains of the impacting photons with higher energy after making good for the hole is like a torus photon (posts "What Donuts? Dipoles?" and "Torus Photons" dated 29 Dec 2017).
\(K_{max}=hf_{\psi}-hf_{hole}\)
When the torus photon collapses however, the resulting particle may not have a full unit charge. It may be a partial charge of size smaller than \(a_{\psi\,c}\).
Is \(f_{osc}\) valid?
Note: The previous version of this post has mistaken \(f_{osc}\gt f_{o}\) or \(f_{hole}\) that was wrong.
This line of best fit has gradient\(\rightarrow\infty\) as \(x\rightarrow\infty\). For any such line fitted closer to the origin, it has gradient \(\lt\infty\). "Threshold", the x-intercept of this line is not unique.
This is a line to fit V-I characteristics of a gas discharge tube at the onset of glow discharge,
where \(x=log(I)\). The drop in voltage here is attributed to negative charges created.
This should not be confused with,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
where \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of ejected electrons and \(\Phi=hf_o\) the Work Function defined by \(f_o\), the threshold frequency. This relation answers the question: "What happens to the excess energy of the photon beyond \(\Phi\) after impact?"
Using sodium, \(Na\)
\(f_o=4.39*10^{14}\,Hz\)
If we reverse and find \(a_{\psi}\) using
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\) --- (*)
with a change in notation,
\(f_{hole}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi\,hole}}}\)
\(a_{\psi\,hole}=2\pi\left(\cfrac{c}{f_{hole}}\right)^2=2.93\text{e-}12\,m\)
What is this small hole?
Could it be that \(f_{osc}\) of sodium, opens up this small hole and subsequent photons that falls into it, is split into two parts,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
\(\Phi=hf_{hole}\), \(f\) is the frequency of the impacting photons and \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of the ejected particles. \(f_{osc}\) of sodium is given by,
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi\,Na}}}\)
where \(a_{\psi\,Na}\) is the size of sodium \(\psi\) cloud.
\(f_{osc}\) opens up a hole denoted by \(a_{\psi\,hole}\), and all photons at greater size than \(a_{\psi\,hole}\) (lower frequency than \(f_{hole}\), as indicated by (*)) are rejected by the hole. If this is the role of \(f_{osc}\), then using a narrow bandwidth of photons at \(f_{osc}\) and illuminating the metal with photons at bigger size than \(a_{hole}\) will cause the metal to appear very bright and without the emission of charged particles. All illuminating photons is rejected by the hole opened by \(f_{osc}\).
Photons of size smaller, \(a_{\psi}\lt a_{\psi\,hole}\) falls into the hole. When do such photons return after falling into the hole? What dictates the size of the hole? Hole of different sizes could explain the seemingly different processes that occurs simultaneously during photoelectric emission where two \(K_{max}\) values were noted. The post related to this is "More Fodo Effects" dated 04 Jun 2014; two related diagrams are shown below,
Impurities could explain the two \(K_{max}s\).
\(f_{hole}\) is the threshold frequency. Given \(f_{\psi}\), \(a_{\psi}\) can be derived given,
\(2\pi a_{\psi}=n\lambda=n\cfrac{c}{f_{\psi}}\)
\(f_{\psi}=\cfrac{c}{2\pi a_{\psi}}\), with \(n=1\)
but an impacting photon interact through,
\(f_{\psi}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\)
when \(f_{\psi}\gt f_{hole}\), \(a_{\psi}\lt a_{\psi\,hole}\) and the photon goes through the hole, and its energy is split via,
\(K_{max}=hf-\Phi\)
\(\Phi=hf_{hole}\) and \(K_{max}\) is the maximum kinetic energy of a emitted particle.
\(f_{osc}\) that triggers \(f_{hole}\) is lower than \(f_{hole}\). \(f_{hole}\) alone does not cause photoelectric emission. \(f_{osc}\), a frequency below the threshold, has first to create the hole, via a mode of oscillation with resonance at,
\(f_{osc}=c\sqrt{\cfrac{2\pi}{a_{\psi}}}\)
where \(a_{\psi}\) is the size of the \(\psi\) ball.
This hole is in effect, a region of negative energy that minus off energy of subsequent impacting photons of higher frequencies. Photons of lower frequencies are too big to fit into the hole. And only the resonance frequency, \(f_{osc}\) opens the hole in the metal.
Besides being convoluted, this explanation does not hold \(a_{\psi\,hole}\) at all, apart from the exertion that \(f_{osc}\) caused it. It however, allows for many size holes that can account for more than one \(K_{max}\) and allows \(f_{osc}\) to be different from the threshold frequency. But charges are still created within the metal at \(f_{osc}\) and, higher frequency photons interacting with the holes created can be outside the metal, ie emitted, when they return from the time dimension.
How does \(f_{osc}\) create charges? \(f_{osc}\) set the \(\psi\) cloud of the atom into resonance and the atom loses its orbiting valence electrons. And, how a photon of higher energy \(f_{\psi}\gt f_{hole}\) ejects a particle of kinetic energy \(K_{max}\) after filling in the hole? The hole requires \(E=hf_{hole}\), what remains of the impacting photons with higher energy after making good for the hole is like a torus photon (posts "What Donuts? Dipoles?" and "Torus Photons" dated 29 Dec 2017).
\(K_{max}=hf_{\psi}-hf_{hole}\)
When the torus photon collapses however, the resulting particle may not have a full unit charge. It may be a partial charge of size smaller than \(a_{\psi\,c}\).
Is \(f_{osc}\) valid?
Note: The previous version of this post has mistaken \(f_{osc}\gt f_{o}\) or \(f_{hole}\) that was wrong.
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
Pulling Crystals
This was what I thought of pulling silicon crystal,
and the artifacts that it creates. This is what I thought that would reduce such ringing artifacts,
\(\theta\) for diamond cubic crystals will be,
\(OA=OC=\cfrac{3}{4}\sqrt{\cfrac{2}{3}}a\)
\(OH=\cfrac{1}{4}\sqrt{\cfrac{2}{3}}a\)
\(\theta=arcsin(\cfrac{OH}{OC})=arcsin(\cfrac{1}{3})=19.47^o\).
where \(C\) is at the first layer and is bonded to the next layer of silicon is at \(O\). The next pull does not form up the bond along \(OA\), but it is at \(19.47^o\) from \(O\). Bonds similar to \(CO\) form up else where in the crystal. After four steps, because \(OH=\cfrac{1}{4}AH\), the atom needed at \(A\) falls into place. At each step, a sheet of atoms is shifted into place.
Good night...
and the artifacts that it creates. This is what I thought that would reduce such ringing artifacts,
\(\theta\) for diamond cubic crystals will be,
\(OA=OC=\cfrac{3}{4}\sqrt{\cfrac{2}{3}}a\)
\(OH=\cfrac{1}{4}\sqrt{\cfrac{2}{3}}a\)
\(\theta=arcsin(\cfrac{OH}{OC})=arcsin(\cfrac{1}{3})=19.47^o\).
where \(C\) is at the first layer and is bonded to the next layer of silicon is at \(O\). The next pull does not form up the bond along \(OA\), but it is at \(19.47^o\) from \(O\). Bonds similar to \(CO\) form up else where in the crystal. After four steps, because \(OH=\cfrac{1}{4}AH\), the atom needed at \(A\) falls into place. At each step, a sheet of atoms is shifted into place.
Good night...
Townsend Discharge In Solids
Cont'd from the post "Hollow Metal" dated 29 Dec 2018, if the matter is a gas, \(I_{osc}=q_e*f_{osc}\) might be Townsend discharge, where \(q_e=1.602176565\text{e-19}\,C\)
A table of \(I_{osc}\) for covalent bond is given below.
Apart from the fact that \(I_{osc}\approx10^{-6}\,\text{to}\,10^{-5}\), there is no reason to believe that \(I_{osc}\) triggers Townsend discharge.
However, if \(I_{osc}\) does trigger a discharge, then the negative charges produced during resonance will reduce the measured voltage and increase the current. The changes in current and voltage are continued only if the resonance is sustained. This means, the current remains at \(I_{osc}\). Superimposed on this is the effect of created charges that reduces the voltage and increases the current. The applied voltage is also constant. Townsend discharge then does not occur unless \(I_{osc}\) is achieved first with a specific applied voltage (\(V_{osc}\)) and maintained at this specific voltage. As long as there are free charges inside the tube, the tube is conductive. If this is the case, a discharge tube when subjected to a higher voltage that produces a higher current, \(I\gt I_{osc}\), will not glow or arc as there are no free charges in the tube. This would refute the ionization-avalanche mechanism as the explanation for discharge because this mechanism should also occur at higher voltage. Does \(V_{osc}\) exist for sustained discharge? And that all discharge must pass through \(V_{osc}\)?
Does this happen in a metal like \(Cu\) where a current \(I_{osc}=1.025\text{e-05}\,A\) creates more charge carriers?
Maybe...
Note: no data means no data but its does not mean no information, not including them will be wrong.
A table of \(I_{osc}\) for covalent bond is given below.
| atomic no. | symbol | name | Covalent (single bond) pm | f_osc (10^14)Hz | _hf eV | q_e*f_osc A |
| 1 | H | hydrogen | 38 | 1.2190 | 0.504 | 1.953E-05 |
| 2 | He | helium | 32 | 1.3284 | 0.549 | 2.128E-05 |
| 3 | Li | lithium | 134 | 0.6492 | 0.268 | 1.040E-05 |
| 4 | Be | beryllium | 90 | 0.7921 | 0.328 | 1.269E-05 |
| 5 | B | boron | 82 | 0.8299 | 0.343 | 1.330E-05 |
| 6 | C | carbon | 77 | 0.8564 | 0.354 | 1.372E-05 |
| 7 | N | nitrogen | 75 | 0.8677 | 0.359 | 1.390E-05 |
| 8 | O | oxygen | 73 | 0.8795 | 0.364 | 1.409E-05 |
| 9 | F | fluorine | 71 | 0.8918 | 0.369 | 1.429E-05 |
| 10 | Ne | neon | 69 | 0.9047 | 0.374 | 1.449E-05 |
| 11 | Na | sodium | 154 | 0.6056 | 0.250 | 9.702E-06 |
| 12 | Mg | magnesium | 130 | 0.6591 | 0.273 | 1.056E-05 |
| 13 | Al | aluminium | 118 | 0.6918 | 0.286 | 1.108E-05 |
| 14 | Si | silicon | 111 | 0.7133 | 0.295 | 1.143E-05 |
| 15 | P | phosphorus | 106 | 0.7299 | 0.302 | 1.169E-05 |
| 16 | S | sulfur | 102 | 0.7441 | 0.308 | 1.192E-05 |
| 17 | Cl | chlorine | 99 | 0.7553 | 0.312 | 1.210E-05 |
| 18 | Ar | argon | 97 | 0.7630 | 0.316 | 1.222E-05 |
| 19 | K | potassium | 196 | 0.5368 | 0.222 | 8.600E-06 |
| 20 | Ca | calcium | 174 | 0.5697 | 0.236 | 9.127E-06 |
| 21 | Sc | scandium | 144 | 0.6262 | 0.259 | 1.003E-05 |
| 22 | Ti | titanium | 136 | 0.6444 | 0.266 | 1.032E-05 |
| 23 | V | vanadium | 125 | 0.6721 | 0.278 | 1.077E-05 |
| 24 | Cr | chromium | 127 | 0.6668 | 0.276 | 1.068E-05 |
| 25 | Mn | manganese | 139 | 0.6374 | 0.264 | 1.021E-05 |
| 26 | Fe | iron | 125 | 0.6721 | 0.278 | 1.077E-05 |
| 27 | Co | cobalt | 126 | 0.6695 | 0.277 | 1.073E-05 |
| 28 | Ni | nickel | 121 | 0.6832 | 0.283 | 1.095E-05 |
| 29 | Cu | copper | 138 | 0.6397 | 0.265 | 1.025E-05 |
| 30 | Zn | zinc | 131 | 0.6566 | 0.272 | 1.052E-05 |
| 31 | Ga | gallium | 126 | 0.6695 | 0.277 | 1.073E-05 |
| 32 | Ge | germanium | 122 | 0.6803 | 0.281 | 1.090E-05 |
| 33 | As | arsenic | 119 | 0.6889 | 0.285 | 1.104E-05 |
| 34 | Se | selenium | 116 | 0.6977 | 0.289 | 1.118E-05 |
| 35 | Br | bromine | 114 | 0.7038 | 0.291 | 1.128E-05 |
| 36 | Kr | krypton | 110 | 0.7165 | 0.296 | 1.148E-05 |
| 37 | Rb | rubidium | 211 | 0.5173 | 0.214 | 8.289E-06 |
| 38 | Sr | strontium | 192 | 0.5423 | 0.224 | 8.689E-06 |
| 39 | Y | yttrium | 162 | 0.5904 | 0.244 | 9.459E-06 |
| 40 | Zr | zirconium | 148 | 0.6177 | 0.255 | 9.897E-06 |
| 41 | Nb | niobium | 137 | 0.6420 | 0.266 | 1.029E-05 |
| 42 | Mo | molybdenum | 145 | 0.6241 | 0.258 | 9.999E-06 |
| 43 | Tc | technetium | 156 | 0.6017 | 0.249 | 9.640E-06 |
| 44 | Ru | ruthenium | 126 | 0.6695 | 0.277 | 1.073E-05 |
| 45 | Rh | rhodium | 135 | 0.6468 | 0.267 | 1.036E-05 |
| 46 | Pd | palladium | 131 | 0.6566 | 0.272 | 1.052E-05 |
| 47 | Ag | silver | 153 | 0.6075 | 0.251 | 9.734E-06 |
| 48 | Cd | cadmium | 148 | 0.6177 | 0.255 | 9.897E-06 |
| 49 | In | indium | 144 | 0.6262 | 0.259 | 1.003E-05 |
| 50 | Sn | tin | 141 | 0.6329 | 0.262 | 1.014E-05 |
| 51 | Sb | antimony | 138 | 0.6397 | 0.265 | 1.025E-05 |
| 52 | Te | tellurium | 135 | 0.6468 | 0.267 | 1.036E-05 |
| 53 | I | iodine | 133 | 0.6516 | 0.269 | 1.044E-05 |
| 54 | Xe | xenon | 130 | 0.6591 | 0.273 | 1.056E-05 |
| 55 | Cs | caesium | 225 | 0.5010 | 0.207 | 8.027E-06 |
| 56 | Ba | barium | 198 | 0.5340 | 0.221 | 8.556E-06 |
| 57 | La | lanthanum | 169 | 0.5781 | 0.239 | 9.261E-06 |
| 58 | Ce | cerium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 59 | Pr | praseodymium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 60 | Nd | neodymium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 61 | Pm | promethium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 62 | Sm | samarium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 63 | Eu | europium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 64 | Gd | gadolinium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 65 | Tb | terbium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 66 | Dy | dysprosium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 67 | Ho | holmium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 68 | Er | erbium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 69 | Tm | thulium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 70 | Yb | ytterbium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 71 | Lu | lutetium | 160 | 0.5941 | 0.246 | 9.518E-06 |
| 72 | Hf | hafnium | 150 | 0.6136 | 0.254 | 9.830E-06 |
| 73 | Ta | tantalum | 138 | 0.6397 | 0.265 | 1.025E-05 |
| 74 | W | tungsten | 146 | 0.6219 | 0.257 | 9.964E-06 |
| 75 | Re | rhenium | 159 | 0.5960 | 0.246 | 9.548E-06 |
| 76 | Os | osmium | 128 | 0.6642 | 0.275 | 1.064E-05 |
| 77 | Ir | iridium | 137 | 0.6420 | 0.266 | 1.029E-05 |
| 78 | Pt | platinum | 128 | 0.6642 | 0.275 | 1.064E-05 |
| 79 | Au | gold | 144 | 0.6262 | 0.259 | 1.003E-05 |
| 80 | Hg | mercury | 149 | 0.6156 | 0.255 | 9.863E-06 |
| 81 | Tl | thallium | 148 | 0.6177 | 0.255 | 9.897E-06 |
| 82 | Pb | lead | 147 | 0.6198 | 0.256 | 9.930E-06 |
| 83 | Bi | bismuth | 146 | 0.6219 | 0.257 | 9.964E-06 |
| 84 | Po | polonium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 85 | At | astatine | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 86 | Rn | radon | 145 | 0.6241 | 0.258 | 9.999E-06 |
| 87 | Fr | francium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 88 | Ra | radium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 89 | Ac | actinium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 90 | Th | thorium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 91 | Pa | protactinium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 92 | U | uranium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 93 | Np | neptunium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 94 | Pu | plutonium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 95 | Am | americium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 96 | Cm | curium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 97 | Bk | berkelium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 98 | Cf | californium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 99 | Es | einsteinium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 100 | Fm | fermium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 101 | Md | mendelevium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 102 | No | nobelium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 103 | Lr | lawrencium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 104 | Rf | rutherfordium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 105 | Db | dubnium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 106 | Sg | seaborgium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 107 | Bh | bohrium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 108 | Hs | hassium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 109 | Mt | meitnerium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 110 | Ds | darmstadtium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 111 | Rg | roentgenium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 112 | Cn | copernicium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 113 | Nh | nihonium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 114 | Fl | flerovium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 115 | Mc | moscovium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 116 | Lv | livermorium | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 117 | Ts | tennessine | no data | no data | no data | no data |
| 118 | Og | oganesson | no data | no data | no data | no data |
Apart from the fact that \(I_{osc}\approx10^{-6}\,\text{to}\,10^{-5}\), there is no reason to believe that \(I_{osc}\) triggers Townsend discharge.
However, if \(I_{osc}\) does trigger a discharge, then the negative charges produced during resonance will reduce the measured voltage and increase the current. The changes in current and voltage are continued only if the resonance is sustained. This means, the current remains at \(I_{osc}\). Superimposed on this is the effect of created charges that reduces the voltage and increases the current. The applied voltage is also constant. Townsend discharge then does not occur unless \(I_{osc}\) is achieved first with a specific applied voltage (\(V_{osc}\)) and maintained at this specific voltage. As long as there are free charges inside the tube, the tube is conductive. If this is the case, a discharge tube when subjected to a higher voltage that produces a higher current, \(I\gt I_{osc}\), will not glow or arc as there are no free charges in the tube. This would refute the ionization-avalanche mechanism as the explanation for discharge because this mechanism should also occur at higher voltage. Does \(V_{osc}\) exist for sustained discharge? And that all discharge must pass through \(V_{osc}\)?
Does this happen in a metal like \(Cu\) where a current \(I_{osc}=1.025\text{e-05}\,A\) creates more charge carriers?
Maybe...
Note: no data means no data but its does not mean no information, not including them will be wrong.