Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
10631347 | Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids | 2005 | 12 Pages |
Abstract
Arguments in favor of the electric modulus formalism are reviewed, and several misunderstandings and misrepresentations are corrected. It is argued that different representations of the same experimental data provide additional, rather then subtractive, insights into the difficult problem of understanding ionic conductivity in melts, glasses and crystals.
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Materials Science
Ceramics and Composites
Authors
I.M. Hodge, K.L. Ngai, C.T. Moynihan,