![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'll defer to chemists on this one, but I had thought that the term was usually used in the form sublimation. That would seem like a natural disambig, with this article being about the band. Any thoughts? Tokerboy 03:22 Nov 11, 2002 (UTC)
Shouldn't "sublimation" be a disamiguation page?
I agree. This page should be "Sublimation (physics)" and another should be "Sublimation (psychology)". -- Mike Hardy
( William M. Connolley 09:58, 2004 Apr 17 (UTC)) Being picky... why is this page sublimation (chemistry) not sub (physics)? On the grounds that chemistry is for reactions and stuff.
This article should be part of both the Chemistry portal and the Physics portal. It is a typical physical-chemistry topic. Chemistry is not just "reactions and stuff".
jun 13 11
Yes. Well one would have to look at the literal meaning of the word, and the different forms of the word firstly. Now if sublime isn't a form of the word sublimation, I'm sadly mistaken. Also when you ask, what is the noun, then you begin to get disconnects. Surely sublimate is the noun. Which would be, that which was sublimed, or has gone through the process of sublimation.
more thoughts later ---- ________- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffrey mcmahan ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
end of J.M. cite ----
another definition sublimation is a type of evaporation in which a solid changes directly to a gas without going through a liquid state.
The definition in the article should read:
"Sublimation of an element or compound is the direct transition from the solid to the gas phase".
The fact that "the liquid phase cannot be observed" is not a question of rapidity. It simply does not occur. In other words, sublimation involves neither fusion (solid to liquid transition) nor vaporisation (liquid to gas).
If one describes sublimation as "a type of evaporation", it should be clearly stated that it is a different process from vaporisation which is the liquid to gas transition.
The english verb "sublimate" and the noun "sublimation" should be used throughout to describe the transition from the solid to the gas phase.
Can this word be correctly used to describe the loss of moisture content in snow in extremly cold subfreezing tempertures ?
Webster's 8th Collegiate (1977) uses, in our physics (or physical chemistry) realm:
That is to say, for them, "to sublimate" may involve conversion from vapor to solid, but they imply it is applicable to conversion from vapor to solid only when direct conversion from solid to vapor has preceded it as part of an overall process.
In contrast,
IMO, our article is probably using "sublimate" with either
And while we're at it, we use
without explicitly specifying their relationships.
I'll look at some bigger dictionaries, but i'd love to have someone pre-empt my impending editing spree.
--
Jerzy
(t) 09:26, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)
Good news: Amer. Her. Dict. supports all of our usages; IMO we've got the facts straight, and all that's needed is
-- Jerzy (t) 16:38, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)
I know that this debate was carried out some time back but on reading through I feel I should add that the dictionaries quoted are not authorities for International English generally as they reflect specifically American usage in this respect. Elsewhere in English-speaking countries the generally-accepted form is 'sublime' for the verb and 'sublimate' for the substance that forms after sublimation. The OED, which I think is more widely consulted than Webster's states that both forms are used but that sublime is the original form for the verb and sublimate is of more limited use (possibly as a result of back formation from the word sublimation). Sublimate is of ancient usage as a noun.-- AssegaiAli ( talk) 12:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted the edit by User:Jgassens, which said that ice at temperatures below the freezing point of water does not sublimate except at low pressures. This is a common misconception, but anyone who has seen their ice cubes shrink in their freezer has seen the sublimation in action. What matters is the partial pressure of water (also see vapor pressure): if it is below the pressure for the solid-vapor equilibrium as seen in the the phase diagram, the solid will sublimate until that pressure is reached (which for an open system in a dry environment won't happen, so all of the ice will sublimate). If it is above the equilibrium pressure, the vapor will deposit on the solid until the pressure reaches the equilibrium. If the partial pressure of water is at its equilibrium value, nothing will seem to happen, but microscopically there is still sublimation and deposition going on with equal rates, resulting in a dynamic equilibrium.
This is the exact same situation as for iodine. Dry ice is different becase, at 1 atm, it is below the pressure of the triple point, which means that not only one sees sublimation, but also there is no way of having liquid CO2 at any temperature (at 1 atm). Itub 16:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
The article states that formation of frost is an example of deposition, yet the phase diagram for water shows that this is not possible. The water vapor must first turn into a liquid before it can turn into a solid, because the pressure is not low enough for deposition to occur.
Here is a phase diagram for reference: http://encarta.msn.com/media_461541579/Phase_Diagram_for_Water.html
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cannonstudent ( talk • contribs) 2006-11-17T14:53:27.
"ALL ELEMENTS SUMBLIMATE!!!!!!" seems very unprofessional. I suggest a removal. -- 71.162.113.31 01:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind, appears to be fixed-- 71.162.113.31 01:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Added by Vortex150:
"Sublimation is not actually correct. The solid phase actually goes through a liquid phase, at the surface of the solid, before a gas, called a two-step phase transition. See the following research paper on 21 April 2008. [1]"
Cheers Freestyle-69 ( talk) 21:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
We must change category because the opposite of something (chemistry) may not be somethingelse (physics).-- Xoristzatziki ( talk) 11:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
If I'm mistaken (and I could very well be), hanging wet cloth outdoors in freezing weather is generally a bad idea, unless the humidity is very low, as the liquid water in the cloth will simply freeze solid. According to the freeze-drying article, this is a more complicated procedure, used to preserve perishable material, not to dry your laundry. In any case, someone knowledgeable on this subject should change the section on sublimation of water to clarify. 82.139.81.16 ( talk) 08:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
98.234.179.237 ( talk) 09:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
This section contains statements which are either incorrect-unintellegible, or redundant (already reported elsewhere in the article).
So, if there are no objections, I will completely remove it -- GianniG46 ( talk) 17:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The "See Also" section of this article includes a link for Plasma->Gas transitions, labeled "Recombination" but links to Carrier generation and recombination; which seems to have nothing to do with either plasma or gas (that article is about semiconductors). I think it's supposed to link to Plasma recombination. I'd edit it, but I have no idea how as the table in the "See Also" section does not appear anywhere in this article's "Edit" page. Draconx ( talk) 21:12, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
it is also that it is a transformation directly from the solid phase to the gaseous phase without passing through an intermediate liquid phase--
114.79.54.95 (
talk) 12:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)--
114.79.54.95 (
talk) 12:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)--
114.79.54.95 (
talk)
12:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
At normal pressures, most chemical compounds and elements possess three different states at different temperatures. In these cases, the transition from the solid to the gaseous state requires an intermediate liquid state. Note, however, that the pressure referred to here is the partial pressure of the substance, not the total (e.g., atmospheric) pressure of the entire system. So, all solids that possess an appreciable vapor pressure at a certain temperature usually can sublime in air (e.g., water ice just below 0°C). For some substances, such as carbon and arsenical, sublimation is much easier than evaporation from the melt, because the pressure of their triple point is very high, and it is difficult to obtain them as liquids. Sublimation requires additional energy and is an endothermic change. The enthalpy of sublimation (also called heat of sublimation) can be calculated as the enthalpy of fusion plus the enthalpy of vaporization. The reverse process of sublimation is deposition. The formation of frost is an example of meteorological deposition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.54.95 ( talk) 12:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I went ahead and removed the photo of the steaming poles. The image description states that strong sunlight was shining on the ice-covered poles in air temperatures "just above freezing". By definition, sublimation occurs below the melting point of a substance (in this case, water). A far more likely explanation of what's happening in the photo is that the sun is directly heating the pole, melting the ice and warming the water until it steams in the cool, moist air.
Also, it was my understanding that water sublimation can't produce visible mist at all. The conditions that allow for water sublimation and water condensation (temperature and humidity) are mutually exclusive, are they not? -- Lukeonia1 ( talk) 08:31, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Sublimation_(phase_transition)#Water states
This allows a wet cloth to be hung outdoors in freezing weather and retrieved later in a dry state.
Doesn't wet imply liquid (as opposed to solid) water, so this is simply evaporation? cmɢʟee⎆ τaʟκ 08:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
As a practising Chemistry teacher who has worked in both countries, I am very aware that in Britain (and probably a lot of former colonies), sublimation can also mean the opposite of what this article describes, what is called deposition in the US. I think the article should describe this. It is rather surprising that this has (apparently) not arisen before. -- John ( talk) 10:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sublimation (phase transition). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:59, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
The reverse process is not "desublimation", nor is "sublimation" used "generically" to refer to the reverse process. The reference given states that sublimation means "to convert (a solid substance) by heat into a vapor, which on cooling condenses again to solid form". In other words, going from solid to gas is sublimation. It then mentions that something that has gone straight from solid to gas (when heated)will also go straight from gas to solid (when cooled), but that is not part of the definition. If sublimation meant the change of state in either direction, it would say "to convert (a solid substance) by heat into a vapor, or to convert (a gaseous substance) by cooling into a solid". The correct term for the opposite process is "deposition". At least I try ( talk) 13:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC) At least I try ( talk) 13:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to know if it is 'to sublimate' or 'to sublime'?
I would say sublimate, sublimates and sublimations is the correct form. I consistently cringe when I see 'sublimes' in a chemical context. For so many reasons. RhinoMind ( talk) 09:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Please add Cause if Sublimation Navjot1200 ( talk) 06:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the water paragraph, the triple point pressure of 612Pa is said to be equal to 0.0006 atmospheres. It's wrong it's actually 0.006 atmospheres (x10 error).
Here is a converter so you can check : https://www.justintools.com/unit-conversion/pressure.php?k1=pascals&k2=atmosphere-atm-standard&q=610 Positive Electron ( talk) 17:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Marking as answered. OccultSlolem ( talk) 20:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)