1946
DOI: 10.1103/physrev.69.347
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Metastable Ions Formed by Electron Impact in Hydrocarbon Gases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

1949
1949
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 167 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These experimental findings demonstrate that anion fragmentation is very slow. At low energies (the exact upper limit also depends upon the particular instrumental conditions) it is thus possible to describe these processes in the framework of a statistical approximation [32][33][34]. NIs which dissociate inside the ion source, but after a time much longer than a nuclear vibrational period, are detected as "normal" species.…”
Section: Discussion Of Anion Decay Kineticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These experimental findings demonstrate that anion fragmentation is very slow. At low energies (the exact upper limit also depends upon the particular instrumental conditions) it is thus possible to describe these processes in the framework of a statistical approximation [32][33][34]. NIs which dissociate inside the ion source, but after a time much longer than a nuclear vibrational period, are detected as "normal" species.…”
Section: Discussion Of Anion Decay Kineticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A possible example of this behaviour is to be found in the ratio ml*/m,* for the reactions of [C3H70]+ ions derived from diethyl ether. [ (2). This pair of competing reactions is discussed further in the section on Gaussian metastable peaks; as will be seen, the system is indeed complex.…”
Section: (2) Experimental Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The probability of removing two dell teriums rather than a deuterium and a protium from B 2D 4H + is 3 j4 X 4 j5=3 /5 , and one would predict a pattern coefficient of 14 compared with 18 observed. Similarly, for B2DI-:I+ one would predict 0.4 X 66.9 = 27 instead of 29 , and for BDH+, 8.8 instead of 10. For B 2H + one would expect 0.9 instead of zero, and for BH+, 2.4 as observed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%