Paper detail

Comparative Electron Irradiations of Amorphous and Crystalline Astrophysical Ice Analogues

Laboratory studies of the radiation chemistry occurring in astrophysical ices have demonstrated the dependence of this chemistry on a number of experimental parameters. One experimental parameter which has received significantly less attention is that of the phase of the solid ice under investigation. In this present study, we have performed systematic 2 keV electron irradiations of the amorphous and crystalline phases of pure CH3OH and N2O astrophysical ice analogues. Radiation-induced decay of these ices and the concomitant formation of products were monitored in situ using FT-IR spectroscopy. A direct comparison between the irradiated amorphous and crystalline CH3OH ices revealed a more rapid decay of the former compared to the latter. Interestingly, a significantly lesser difference was observed when comparing the decay rates of the amorphous and crystalline N2O ices. These observations have been rationalised in terms of the strength and extent of the intermolecular forces present in each ice. The strong and extensive hydrogen-bonding network that exists in crystalline CH3OH (but not in the amorphous phase) is suggested to significantly stabilise this phase against radiation-induced decay. Conversely, although alignment of the dipole moment of N2O is anticipated to be more extensive in the crystalline structure, its weak attractive potential does not significantly stabilise the crystalline phase against radiation-induced decay, hence explaining the smaller difference in decay rates between the amorphous and crystalline phases of N2O compared to those of CH3OH. Our results are relevant to the astrochemistry of interstellar ices and icy Solar System objects, which may experience phase changes due to thermally-induced crystallisation or space radiation-induced amorphisation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access11 authors4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.