Talk:Proton conductor

message: ==Boundary of different type of conductors==
What would happen at the boundary of a metallic electron conductor and a proton conductor?  — Omegatron 16:05, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: At metal/electrolyte boundaries, chemistry happens.  As I understand the simple version... if the protons are flowing from the proton conductor and towards the metal, then the metal is supplying electrons at the same rate for a constant current through the boundary... and neutral hydrogen atoms are being created as protons hit electrons.  So you'd get bubbles of H2.  If the electric current is going the other way (as it does in fuel cells,) then the metal is stealing electrons from dissolved hydrogen gas (or from the Hydrogen in water), leaving protons behind which then flow off into the proton conductor.--Wjbeaty 02:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Also note that in common lead-acid cells, because of the boundary-type, the sufuric acid behaves as a pure proton-conductor.  The surface-chemistry allows net proton-flow, but blocks the negative sulfate ions (actually both battery plates **equally** take up negative ions during battery operation, giving zero net sulfate flow across the electrolyte.)  The hundreds of amperes in a car-battery are flowing protons, not negative ions.75.172.20.111 (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

message: Put proton-exchange membrane in the proton-conductor article?  I think that would be analogous to merging the "transistor" entry with the entry for "silicon."  A proton conductor can be a piece of red hot ceramic or a block of ice.  A proton-exchange membrane is made of proton-conductive material, but all of the fuel-cell issues wouldn't really belong here.--Wjbeaty 05:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How is a PEM like a transistor? I don't think it's analogous to merging Transistor with Silicon at all. Silicon is a specific substance, proton conductor is not. If you honestly don't think they should be merged, you should edit them so they don't seem like exactly the same thing. Also, I'm pretty sure pure Ice Ih can't conduct protons, so it must be talking about a different form of ice. —Keenan Pepper 21:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  More like merging car with steel, since cars are a specific type of steel. — Omegatron 21:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, no, cars are complex machines with some parts made out of steel. Any other ridiculous analogies? —Keenan Pepper 21:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not if that one didn't work. — Omegatron 21:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  A PEM is a highly engineered device, while a "proton conductor" is a wide class of substances having little to do with fuel cells.  I thought my mention of incandescent ceramics and ice would make this clear.  The Proton conductor entry isn't about membranes or organic conductors or about one component of a fuel cell.  But if we had to merge them, you could move PEM in as a sub-topic.   Also: the entry says "ice," and since WP isn't a handbook for chemists, the majority of readers would take "ice" to be the stuff in their refrigerator, not the high pressure phases nor methane ice, and not ice made from ultra-pure deionized water.  Rather than getting into these types of arguments, you could suggest the implied impurities by adding the term "everyday ice" instead, no discussion required.  --Wjbeaty 23:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This intrigued me, so I got out my multimeter and tested the resistance of an ice cube from the freezer and some tap water. The ice cube was about 5-10 MΩ, more than the tap water which was about 1 MΩ. That's pretty high for a "conductor". Anyway, I withdraw my merge suggestion. —Keenan Pepper 04:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Were you using a proton multimeter?  Hydrogen gas forms at the junction of an electron conductor and a proton conductor, as explained above. — Omegatron 07:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but the current used to measure the resistance is so low, the amount of hydrogen gas is undetectable. —Keenan Pepper 19:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with proton-exchange membrane 

message: # It doesn't have to be a good conductor to be a proton conductor.   As long as it's the protons that move and not the electrons, it's a proton conductor.
# There are at least 14 different phases of ice, and this hints that maybe it's only certain phases that are good proton conductors. — Omegatron 23:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ice 

message: Is there an si unit of proton conduction?  Faradays for electrons Thuratadays for protons? 
also discharging electricity through materials at high electron concentration disintegrates them, what is the peak chemical (non proton accelerator)proton conduction effect.  basically a spark made of protons? Im thinking very mechanistically yet a superbase coated vortex funnel like they have at malls (charity coin funnel) might continually drive protons towards a locationable high velocity core without reacting with them to produce a superconcentrated stream of really reactive (high velocity) protons to aim at chemistry like possibly alkanes or otherwise minimally reactive materials like cycloalkanes  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.2.34 (talk) 19:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: si unit of proton conduction, effect of high intensity proton streams on molecules