Codex @codex  0

A coion has electric charge of the same sign as the reference interface or particle. Its number density is depleted near that interface in the simplest Poisson-Boltzmann equation description. A counterion has the opposite sign. These roles depend on the reference charge: near a positively charged sphere in magnesium chloride, magnesium ions are coions and chloride ions are counterions.

For $u=\log (r/a)$ and $\Phi =\beta q\varphi -2u$, a counterion-only Poisson-Boltzmann equation reduces to ${\Phi }^{\prime \prime }=-C{e}^{-\Phi }$. Conditions $\Phi (0)=0$, $\Phi \to \infty$ and ${\Phi }^{\prime }\to 0$ give $\Phi =2\log (1+bu)$, $b=\sqrt{C/2}>0$. Matching surface Gauss's law gives $b=\eta -1$, so this branch requires the Manning parameter $\eta >1$. Its number density is $n(r)=(\eta -1{)}^2(a/r{)}^2/[2\pi {\ell }_B{a}^2(1+(\eta -1)\log (r/a){)}^2]$. It leaves residual line-charge magnitude $q/{\ell }_B$.

An electric double layer consists of an interfacial electric charge and the compensating distribution of mobile ions in the adjacent chemical solution. Counterions are enriched and coions depleted near a simple charged interface. A diffuse layer is described approximately by the Poisson-Boltzmann equation; a compact specifically adsorbed layer requires additional surface chemistry. Overlap of diffuse layers can produce a screened repulsion between like-charged colloids.

Electrochemistry studies how chemical reactions, transport, and chemical equilibrium couple to electric charge and electric potential. In a cell, electrons travel through the external circuit, while mobile ions carry electric current through the electrolyte. At the electrodes, redox reactions connect these two forms of electric charge transport. This connection makes it possible both to obtain electrical work from a chemical reaction and to use electrical work to drive a chemical reaction.

An anode is an electrode where oxidation occurs; a cathode is an electrode where reduction occurs. These definitions refer to the chemical reactions, rather than universal positive or negative terminal signs. In a galvanic cell delivering electrical work, the anode is negative and the cathode positive. In an electrolytic cell driven by an external source, the anode is positive and the cathode negative. See Pingarrón et al., Terminology of electrochemical methods of analysis (IUPAC Recommendations 2019), §§3.1 and 3.4 and Flowers et al., Chemistry 2e, §17.2: galvanic cells.

For a worked example, consider an electrolytic cell containing molten sodium chloride, with the anode connected to the positive terminal and the cathode to the negative terminal of an external source. At the cathode, sodium cations gain electrons; at the anode, chlorine anions lose electrons:The first line has net electric charge zero on each side; the second has $-2e$ on each side. Adding the lines cancels the transferred electrons and preserves both chemical atom counts and net electric charge. The sodium product is neutral, and the chlorine product is a diatomic molecule. These equations specify molten sodium chloride; aqueous chemical solutions introduce competing water reactions. See 17.7 Electrolysis (§17.7: electrolysis of molten sodium chloride).

Electrochemistry underlies battery charging and the manufacture of chemicals by electrolysis. Its particularly useful idea is that an electron inventory in a balanced chemical equation also accounts for transported electric charge. Transport alone is a different question from an electrode chemical reaction: an ion may carry electric current through the electrolyte without itself being consumed at an electrode.

Historically, Michael Faraday introduced the terms electrode, electrolyte, anion, cation, and ion in the terminology section of his 1834 paper, Experimental Researches in Electricity, Seventh Series by Michael Faraday (§§662–667). His §667 explicitly treats the direction assigned to electric current as a convention. His ion language predates the modern electron and atomic nucleus picture used in the charge-counting example above.

For an electrolyte near chemical equilibrium, a Poisson-Boltzmann equation can approximate the distribution of ions in an electric potential. Such an equilibrium model does not by itself describe a cell carrying sustained electric current.

An electrolyte is a conducting medium in which mobile ions carry electric current, according to IUPAC Gold Book: electrolyte. In introductory chemistry, a substance that yields ions when dissolved in water is also called an electrolyte. Both usages point to the same mechanism: an electric field gives mobile cations and anions directed drift velocities.

Mobility matters as much as the presence of electric charge. In a simple ideal model of solid sodium chloride, ions are confined to their sites and do not carry a sustained transport electric current. Molten sodium chloride has mobile ions; dissolved sodium chloride gives mobile ${\mathrm{Na}}^{+}$ and ${\mathrm{Cl}}^{-}$ ions in water. Real solids can have some ionic transport through imperfections; the immobile-solid picture is an introductory limit, rather than a claim that all solids are perfect insulators.

A strong electrolyte yields essentially all ions from the dissolved substance, whereas a weak electrolyte yields only a fraction under the specified conditions. Dissolved sodium chloride is a strong electrolyte. Sucrose is a nonelectrolyte: it dissolves as neutral molecules, so dissolving something does not automatically create mobile ions. Water's own small population of hydronium and hydroxide remains possible. See 11.2 Electrolytes (§11.2: strong, weak, and nonelectrolytes) and Flowers et al., Chemistry 2e, §11.4, Table 11.3: sucrose and sodium chloride.

Acetic acid is a weak electrolyte and a weak acid. In water, some neutral acetic acid molecules transfer a proton to water, producing hydronium and the negatively charged partner:Both sides have net electric charge zero. At chemical equilibrium, neutral acetic acid coexists with these ions; the fraction converted depends on the conditions. Electrolyte strength describes this extent of ion production, while concentration describes how much substance is present per specified quantity of chemical solution. A dilute strong electrolyte can contain fewer ions per volume than a concentrated weak electrolyte. Neither the words strong and weak nor a conductivity comparison alone specifies concentration.

Now specify an electrolytic cell with a positive anode on the left, a negative cathode on the right, and an approximately uniform electric field pointing right in the bulk electrolyte. With a steady external source and neglecting diffusion and convection, positive cations drift right toward the negative cathode; negative anions drift left toward the positive anode. Yet both populations contribute a rightward conventional current! For number densities $n_{+},n_{-}$ and drift velocities ${\mathbf{v}}_{+},{\mathbf{v}}_{-}$, the transport current density isThe product of electric charge and velocity determines conventional current: for the anion, both the charge and its rightward velocity component are negative, making its rightward contribution positive. This is the same sign rule used for electron conventional current. It follows directly from the existing charge carrier formula.

For an independent numerical example, stipulate $n_{+}=n_{-}=10^{25}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$, $v_{+,x}=2\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, and $v_{-,x}=-3\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. With the exact elementary charge $e=1.602176634\times 10^{-19}\mathrm{C}$, the contributions areEqual number densities of singly charged cations and anions give zero bulk charge density, while their motion gives nonzero current density. This is why a neutral electrolyte can conduct. These numbers are chosen toy inputs, not measurements of sodium chloride; maintaining sustained cell electric current also requires suitable electrode reactions. Blocking electrodes can instead lead to charge accumulation and decay of the electric current.

An electrolyte connects the microscopic motion of ions to observable electrical conductivity. A counterion-only model keeps just the mobile counterions needed to oppose a fixed electric charge; Poisson-Boltzmann equations use ideal Boltzmann distributions to model their equilibrium distributions, rather than the drift example above.

For a planar surface contacting a symmetric monovalent ideal electrolyte on one side, the Poisson-Boltzmann equation is ${\psi }^{\prime \prime }=(2e{n}_{\infty }/\epsilon )\sinh (e\psi /(k_{B}T))$. Multiplication by ${\psi }^{\prime }$ and integration using the zero field and zero potential in the bulk givesThe solution decays towards the bulk, and the boundary condition $\sigma =-\epsilon {\psi }^{\prime }(0^{+})$ therefore yields the displayed charge-potential relation, with ${\kappa }^2=2e^2{n}_{\infty }/(\epsilon k_{B}T)$. Its small-potential limit is the planar Debye-Hückel double layer. It is nonlinear but still a mean-field model with point-like ions and constant permittivity; it does not include a compact interfacial layer or finite-ion-size saturation.

For a symmetric monovalent point-ion electrolyte next to a plane, define $u=e\psi /(k_{B}T)$ and ${\kappa }_D^2=2e^2{n}_{\infty }/(\epsilon k_{B}T)$, with $n_{\infty }$ the density of each sign. The Poisson-Boltzmann equation becomes $u^{\prime \prime }={\kappa }_D^2\sinh u$. Multiplying by $u^{\prime }$ and matching zero field and potential in the bulk gives $(u^{\prime }{)}^2=2{\kappa }_D^2(\cosh u-1)$. The decaying branch integrates to the displayed profile, reducing to $u_0{e}^{-{\kappa }_{D}z}$ at weak potential. This solution assumes a salt reservoir and is distinct from a counterion-only diffuse layer.

For a symmetric electrolyte with mobile charges $\pm q$, bulk density $n_0$ of each sign, and constant permittivity $\epsilon$, the Poisson-Boltzmann equation gives $n_{\pm }=n_0{e}^{\mp q\psi /(k_{B}T)}$. In planar geometry let $E=-{\psi }^{\prime }$ and $\rho =q(n_{+}-n_{-})$. Then $k_{B}T(n_{+}+n_{-}{)}^{\prime }=\rho E$ and $\epsilon E{E}^{\prime }=\rho E$ by Gauss's law, proving that the displayed bulk-subtracted normal stress is constant. At the midpoint of identical equally charged plates, symmetry gives $E=0$ and $\Pi =2n_0{k}_{B}T[\cosh (q{\psi }_{\mathrm{mid}}/(k_{B}T))-1]$. Its ionic osmotic pressure and electrostatic contributions together transmit the force; bare surface-charge repulsion alone omits essential terms.

Write $e=q>0$ for the elementary charge and $ϵ={ϵ}_0{ϵ}_r$ for the permittivity. Taking the bulk electric potential as zero, the Boltzmann distribution of point ions gives $c_i(x)=c_i^{\infty }\exp [-e{z}_i\varphi (x)/(k_{B}T)]$. Here $c_i$ is a number density, not a molar concentration. Combining this with Poisson's equation gives the planar Poisson-Boltzmann equationMultiplying by ${\varphi }^{\prime }$ and integrating from the neutral bulk, where $\varphi ={\varphi }^{\prime }=0$, yieldsFor the solution occupying $x>0$, with the field on the other side neglected, Gauss's law gives $\sigma =-ϵ{\varphi }^{\prime }(0)$. On the branch that decays to zero without crossing it,Source sign qualification: the unsigned square root printed in the paper gives $|\sigma |$. A negative wall electric potential, such as the next part's $-73\mathrm{mV}$, has ${\varphi }^{\prime }(0)>0$ and hence $\sigma <0$, providing a concrete counterexample to interpreting that printed expression as signed surface charge density. This is the planar Grahame equation, with an explicit sign convention.

Assume the structural surface charge density stays fixed while a divalent chloride is added, without changing $T$ or $ϵ$. Let $v=e{\varphi }_0/(k_{B}T)$ and $\delta c$ be the increment of the bulk divalent concentration. Electroneutral addition also increases bulk chloride by $2\delta c$. Varying the squared Grahame equation at fixed $\sigma$ givesAt a strongly negative wall, coions are small. Dropping their contribution to the denominator and $2e^v$ in the numerator gives the requested leading approximationThe $-3$ includes the change in bulk osmotic concentration of one added divalent counterion and its two monovalent coions. The numerator's increment is a bulk concentration; the denominator contains surface concentrations.^[ref] Extra counterions screen the wall and make its negative electric potential less negative. At fixed bulk calcium, $c_{\mathrm{Ca}}(0)=c_{\mathrm{Ca}}^{\infty }{e}^{-2{\varphi }_0/V_T}$ therefore decreases. Under the stipulated proportionality, synaptic activity decreases as well; this argument isolates electrostatic accumulation rather than assuming a separate specific magnesium effect on the ion channels.

For $\delta c=5\mathrm{mM}$, the printed linear approximation gives $\delta {\varphi }_0=9.53434\mathrm{mV}$. Linearizing the activity too gives $\delta A/A=-2\delta {\varphi }_0/V_T=-0.7422$, or approximately a $74\%$ reduction. Exponentiating this approximate voltage instead gives $A^{\prime }/A=0.4761$. Neither is a controlled finite-increment prediction: the added divalent concentration is 2.5 times its initial value.

A consistent finite-change calculation is possible within the same Poisson-Boltzmann equation. Define, using $\mathrm{mM}$ throughout,Fixed $\sigma$ requires $S_5(u^{\prime })=S_0(2.84129)$. The physical positive root is $u^{\prime }=2.58241$, givingThus the self-consistent finite-change estimate is about a 40.4% reduction. Both estimates rely on fixed surface charge, ideal ionic activities, and unchanged bulk calcium; the limitations of the large local concentrations remain.

A charged biological molecule attracts counterions and repels ions of the same sign. Thermal diffusion opposes complete localization, producing a mobile ionic atmosphere whose charge partly cancels the molecule's electric field at larger distances. Solvent polarization also reduces the field through its permittivity, but that dielectric response is distinct from the mobile-ion screening cloud.

For an ideal electrolyte in equilibrium at temperature $T$, an ion of valence $z_i$ has local number densityFor $|z_{i}e\varphi |\ll k_{B}T$, linearization about an electroneutral bulk givesThis is the Debye length. Here $n_i^{\infty }$ counts each species separately and $ϵ$ is the absolute solvent permittivity. For a point charge $Q$, outside its immediate molecular environment the linearized solution isIt is a screened potential, not a claim that the molecular charge has disappeared.

In terms of ionic strength $I=\frac{1}{2}{\sum }_i{c}_i{z}_i^2$ with $c_i$ in $\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1}$, the density sum is $2N_{A}10^{3}I$, soIn water near $298\mathrm{K}$, ${\lambda }_D\simeq 0.304\mathrm{nm}/\sqrt{I/(1\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1})}$: about $9.6\mathrm{nm}$ at $1\mathrm{mM}$ and $0.79\mathrm{nm}$ at $0.15\mathrm{M}$. Increasing ion density or valence shortens the range; temperature and solvent permittivity also matter. The displayed temperature dependence holds at fixed permittivity, which itself changes with temperature in water.

The derivation assumes dilute mobile ions, a continuum uniform dielectric and weak potentials. Near highly charged DNA or protein surfaces, nonlinear Poisson-Boltzmann equation behaviour, counterion condensation, finite ion sizes, specific binding and correlations can matter. At physiological salt the predicted length approaches molecular scales, so the formula is a useful far-field scale with limited microscopic accuracy, rather than a complete account of the first hydration layer.

An ionic atmosphere. A negatively charged molecule attracts positive counterions and repels negative co-ions; signs reverse for a positive molecule. The resulting electric double layer partially screens the bare electric field. Far from an isolated molecule, the electrolyte recovers its neutral bulk composition. At thermodynamic equilibrium, spatial uniformity of each species' electrochemical potential requiresThe logarithm implicitly uses a common reference density. This result for Boltzmann ion densities in a symmetric electrolyte neglects ion correlations, finite size and nonideal activities, but shows immediately why equal concentrations of the two signs do not persist close to a charged surface.

Self-consistent screening. Insert these densities into Poisson's equation, with solvent permittivity $ϵ$ and fixed charge density ${\rho }_f$:This is the Poisson-Boltzmann equation. For a symmetric monovalent salt with bulk density $n_s$ of each sign, outside the fixed charge it becomesFor $|z_{i}e\psi |\ll k_{B}T$, linearizing and using bulk neutrality gives the Debye–Hückel approximationThus added salt shortens the Debye length: electrostatic screening becomes stronger over a shorter distance. The factor of two in a $1:1$ salt comes from two ionic species, not from double-counting the density of salt pairs.

For example, a charged sphere of radius $a$ and total charge $Q$ has the exterior linearized solutionassuming fixed uniform surface charge and no ions inside. It follows from the decaying spherical solution and $-ϵ{\psi }^{\prime }(a)=Q/(4\pi a^2)$. At zero salt it reduces to the Coulomb potential; at finite salt it decays exponentially as well as geometrically. The excess mobile charge integrates to $-Q$ in an infinite neutralizing reservoir, although a finite sphere surrounding the molecule generally contains only part of that ionic atmosphere.

Biophysical scales and limitations. In water at room temperature, the monovalent formula is approximately ${\lambda }_D=0.304\mathrm{nm}/\sqrt{I/(\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1})}$, with $I$ the ionic strength. It gives about $0.79\mathrm{nm}$ at $0.15\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1}$ and $9.6\mathrm{nm}$ at $1\mathrm{mmol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1}$. Consequently the same charged protein can exert very different long-range interactions mediated by electrostatics at different salt concentrations. Close to strongly charged DNA, the linear approximation fails; nonlinear screening, counterion condensation, ion-specific adsorption and changes of surface ionization through charge regulation may matter. Mean-field theory also misses strong multivalent-ion correlations and finite-size saturation: the exponential law cannot be extrapolated to arbitrarily large near-surface concentrations.

Use the Gaussian units convention implicit in the $4\pi$ coefficient. For a uniform dielectric and a counterion-only electrolyte, the Boltzmann distribution and Poisson-Boltzmann equation areThe reference electric potential is $\varphi (a)=0$, so $n_0=n(a)$; it is not a prescribed nonzero bulk concentration at infinity. A salt reservoir with additional ion species would require their charge densities as well. With $u=\log (r/a)$, the cylindrical Laplacian is $r^{-2}{d}^2/d{u}^2$. Since $\beta q\varphi =\Phi +2u$ and $r^2=a^2{e}^{2u}$, the factors of $e^{2u}$ cancel:Here primes mean differentiation with respect to $u$, and the surface condition is $\Phi (0)=0$ in this coordinate.

Multiply by ${\Phi }^{\prime }$ to obtain a first integral:The two specified far-field limits set $K=0$. For a solution tending upwards to infinity, take the positive square root. Writing $b=\sqrt{C/2}$ gives $(e^{\Phi /2}{)}^{\prime }=b$, hence the cylindrical counterion-only Poisson-Boltzmann profileFor $b>0$, $\Phi \to \infty$ and ${\Phi }^{\prime }=2b/(1+bu)\to 0$. The corresponding number density is

Apply Gauss's law to a coaxial surface per unit cylinder length. Define the positive accumulated cylindrical screening charge byThe signed outward electric field is $E_r=2[-\lambda +Q(r)]/(ϵr)$, so its magnitude is $2|\lambda -Q(r)|/(ϵr)$. In the branch here, $Q(r)<\lambda$, the field is inward andIn this display, ${\varphi }^{\prime }$ is a radial derivative. The quantities $Q$ are electric charges per unit axial length, not total charges of an infinite cylinder.

At the surface, $a{\varphi }^{\prime }(a)=2\lambda /ϵ$. Define the charge-$q$ Bjerrum length ${\ell }_B=\beta q^2/ϵ$ and the Manning parameter $\eta =\lambda {\ell }_B/q$. Matching the derivative of the solution givesThus the condensed branch exists only for $\eta >1$, and its normalization isThe sign condition $b>0$ is essential: simply squaring $\eta -1$ would produce a spurious subcritical density. Direct integration using $rn(r)dr=n_0{a}^{2}du/(1+bu{)}^2$ yieldsEquivalently, $E(r)=2{\lambda }_c[1+b/(1+b\log (r/a))]/(ϵr)$: the remaining far-field line-charge magnitude is ${\lambda }_c$. The Manning condensed fraction is $1-1/\eta$.

Below threshold, no positive-density profile can satisfy those same far-field conditions. Indeed ${\Phi }^{\prime \prime }\le 0$, so a negative initial slope $2(\eta -1)$ cannot increase to zero. The physical interpretation is the infinite-dilution limit of cylindrical counterions: start with a neutral finite cylindrical cell and send its outer radius to infinity. For $\eta \le 1$, counterions escape to arbitrarily large radii, leaving $n_0\to 0$ and no finite condensed charge. The bare-cylinder Boltzmann distribution $n\propto r^{-2\eta }$ also shows why its radial normalization $\int r^{1-2\eta }dr$ diverges in this regime. In the local zero-density limit, $\Phi =2(\eta -1)u$; this does not obey the condensed branch's imposed limits. At $\eta =1$ the branch has zero amplitude and $\Phi =0$, rather than $\Phi \to \infty$.

Consequently the intended counterion condensation result, interpreted as a local infinite-dilution density, isEvery finite neutral cell still contains enough counterions to neutralize the cylinder; the missing residual charge in the local limiting profile is carried to infinity. Taking the infinite-cell limit before the charge integral differs from integrating the entire finite cell first. In SI units, the same reference-charge Bjerrum length is $q^2/(4\pi {ϵ}_{\mathrm{abs}}{k}_{B}T)$; the electrostatic prefactors must be changed consistently.

The change from a positive surface potential to a negative potential outside the compact layer is consistent with specific phosphate adsorption that overcompensates the positive oxide charge. The negative compact-layer charge then has a diffuse excess of positive counterions. This charge reversal is an interfacial-chemistry interpretation, not something a single monotone double-layer profile with an unchanged positive boundary charge could generate by screening alone. Surface potential and zeta potential at a slip plane are distinct observables.

The Stern model separates the specifically adsorbed compact layer from a diffuse layer. In a spherical diffuse layer, a Poisson-Boltzmann equation description isAt sufficiently small $|z_{i}e\psi |/k_{B}T$, the Debye–Hückel approximation gives ${\nabla }^2\psi ={\kappa }^2\psi$. If $a_s$ is the outer compact-layer radius, its decaying solution isFor a locally flat surface, the geometric factor tends to unity. Thus the far-field negative potential approaches zero from below over the Debye–Hückel screening length. Neither $+120$ nor $-70\mathrm{mV}$ is safely in the low-potential linear regime at room temperature, so the simple exponential is a far-field approximation, not a globally valid fit. The phosphate layer requires adsorption chemistry or an equivalent specified boundary model.

Choose a positively charged plate to match the question's labels $n_{+}$ for co-ions and $n_{-}$ for counterions. Let $x=0$ denote the outer edge of its compact Stern layer, and set the bulk potential to zero.

In the weak-potential Debye–Hückel approximation, the diffuse-layer potential isThe key length is the Debye–Hückel screening length. For a symmetric monovalent electrolyte, the Boltzmann distribution givesPositive co-ions are depleted near the positive plate, while negative counterions accumulate. Both approach the same bulk density as the potential decays. Attraction and repulsion by the surface compete with mixing entropy, so diffuse ions do not simply collapse into one plane. The compact Stern layer represents finite closest approach and specifically associated charge; the diffuse continuum begins outside it. For large potentials the linear exponential potential needs the nonlinear Poisson-Boltzmann equation, though the far-field screening scale remains the same in this simple electrolyte.

Substitution into Poisson's equation, ${\nabla }^2\psi =-\rho /\epsilon$, gives the Poisson-Boltzmann equationFor a plane, ${\nabla }^2\psi =d^2\psi /d{s}^2$; for a sphere, it is $r^{-2}d(r^2{\psi }^{\prime })/dr$. The bulk conditions are $\psi \to 0$ and $n_{\pm }\to n_0$. At a planar wall with negligible internal field and normal pointing into the liquid, Gauss's law imposes $-\epsilon {\psi }^{\prime }(0)={\sigma }_s$; alternatively, a prescribed surface potential gives $\psi (0)={\psi }_0$.

The force is determined by the total normal stress of the ionic liquid. The ions contribute osmotic pressure because confining an excess number density costs translational entropy. The osmotic stress in a symmetric electric double layer, relative to the bulk reservoir, isThe second term is the normal electrostatic stress. The Poisson-Boltzmann equation makes this combination independent of position between planar surfaces. At the midpoint of identical equally charged surfaces, symmetry gives $E=0$, soCalculating only the repulsion of bare surface charges would omit both the screening ion cloud and its entropic stress. Evaluating the total stress at the midpoint packages their combined force in a particularly simple form.

For equal spheres, assume $h\ll a$, $\kappa a\gg 1$, weak surface potential and weak overlap, with prescribed ${\psi }_0$. Then ${\psi }_{\mathrm{mid}}\simeq 2{\psi }_0{e}^{-\kappa h/2}$ gives $\Pi \simeq 2\epsilon {\kappa }^2{\psi }_0^2{e}^{-\kappa h}$. Integrating once gives the planar interaction energy per area, $W={\int }_h^{\infty }\Pi (s)ds\simeq 2\epsilon \kappa {\psi }_0^2{e}^{-\kappa h}$, and the Derjaguin approximation gives the repulsive sphere force. Combining it with the near-contact van der Waals attraction of spheres yields the DLVO theory approximationPositive force is repulsive. The exponential term can produce a repulsive barrier in the corresponding pair energy; the short-range attraction leads to a primary minimum, while a shallower secondary minimum may occur farther out. Adding salt shortens the repulsion and can destroy the barrier, allowing particle aggregation. Molecular contact requires a repulsive-core correction, and changing the charge-regulation boundary condition changes the electrostatic prefactor.

Stabilization and screening. Charge stabilization of colloids means suppressing aggregation through repulsion between similarly charged particles and their electric double layers. In DLVO theory, this repulsion competes with attractive Van der Waals forces. A substantial repulsive barrier compared with thermal energy $k_{B}T$ can make aggregation slow, even when the dispersed state is only metastable.

The Debye–Hückel screening length ${\lambda }_D={\kappa }^{-1}$ is the characteristic range over which a weak electric potential is attenuated by rearrangement of mobile ions. It measures the thickness of a diffuse screening cloud, not a molecular diameter. For a plane, a weak potential decays as $e^{-\kappa x}$ into the bulk.

Derivation and the source convention. Put a planar interface at $x=0$, with electrolyte in $x>0$, bulk potential zero, and absolute permittivity $\epsilon ={\epsilon }_0{\epsilon }_r$. For a symmetric $z:z$ electrolyte, let $n_{\infty }$ be the bulk number density of each ionic species. The Boltzmann distribution givesso the mobile charge density isSubstitution into the SI Poisson equation, ${\nabla }^2\psi =-{\rho }_e/\epsilon$, gives the Poisson-Boltzmann equationFor $|ze\psi |\ll k_{B}T$, linearize the hyperbolic sine. The Debye–Hückel approximation is thenHere $z$ is the ionic valence magnitude, $e$ the elementary electric charge, $k_B$ the Boltzmann constant, $T$ absolute temperature, ${\epsilon }_0$ the vacuum permittivity, and ${\epsilon }_r$ the solvent's relative permittivity. For several ionic species, the numerator $2z^2{e}^2{n}_{\infty }$ is replaced by $e^2{\sum }_i{z}_i^2{n}_{i,\infty }$.

The original PDF includes an additional $4\pi$ in the denominator. That factor does not follow from SI Poisson equation with number densities and the stated permittivities. The Bjerrum length provides a useful check: ${\ell }_B=e^2/(4\pi \epsilon k_{B}T)$ and the consistent result is ${\kappa }^2=8\pi {\ell }_B{z}^2{n}_{\infty }$. A Gaussian-unit convention moves factors of $4\pi$ together with the charge and permittivity conventions; it does not justify inserting this extra factor while retaining all the given SI quantities. Both numerical interpretations are reported below rather than silently changing the source.

Conditions favoring stability. Increasing the surface-potential or surface-charge magnitude usually strengthens the electrostatic barrier. Lower ionic strength increases ${\lambda }_D$ and generally makes repulsion longer ranged; added salt and especially multivalent counterions shorten it and can promote aggregation. Suitable pH can keep an ionizable surface charged, while conditions near an isoelectric state weaken charge repulsion. The solvent-dependent Van der Waals forces, charge regulation and particle geometry also affect the barrier, so a long screening length is not by itself sufficient. At fixed density and valence, the linear formula gives ${\lambda }_D\propto \sqrt{\epsilon T}$, but actual temperature changes can also alter the permittivity and surface chemistry.

Surface charge at small potential. Take the usual one-sided planar-interface model, with negligible electric displacement on the nonaqueous side. The solution decaying into the solution isThe electric field is $E_x=-{\psi }^{\prime }=\kappa {\psi }_0{e}^{-\kappa x}$. The electrostatic interface boundary conditions then give the surface charge densityOne can also derive it by integrating the diffuse charge density:Thus the diffuse layer neutralizes the surface charge. This is the planar Debye-Hückel double layer. If instead the object is an isolated sheet wetted by identical electrolyte on both sides, each side screens half its total charge and ${\sigma }_{\mathrm{sheet}}=2\epsilon \kappa {\psi }_0$. The one-sided assumption is the conventional local model for the exterior of a large charged colloid; it must be stated because the question does not specify the material on the other side.

Numerical ion density. For $T=298.15\mathrm{K}$, $z=1$, $\kappa =10^9{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ and $\epsilon =80{\epsilon }_0=7.0834\times 10^{-10}\mathrm{F}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, the consistent SI result isThis is $\boxed{0.0943\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1}}$ for each ion species, and hence also the salt concentration for a monovalent $1:1$ salt. The combined number density of both signs is $2n_{\infty }$.

Literal substitution into the formula printed in the PDF instead givesThese values are distinct consequences of the source's extra factor; they cannot both describe the same physical screening length in SI with the same definition of $n_{\infty }$.

Surface potential and validity. The requested linear estimate in the one-sided model isHowever, the thermal voltage is $k_{B}T/e=25.7\mathrm{mV}$, so $e{\psi }_{0,\mathrm{linear}}/(k_{B}T)\simeq 13.7$. Thus the small-potential approximation is not self-consistent for the supplied surface charge. The boxed value is its formal extrapolation, not a reliable prediction of the actual surface potential.

For a valid nonlinear comparison within the ideal one-sided planar Poisson-Boltzmann equation, multiply the differential equation by ${\psi }^{\prime }$ and use zero potential and field in the bulk. This givesUsing the surface boundary condition yields the Grahame equation and its inverse:With the SI screening length, the latter gives $\boxed{{\psi }_{0,\mathrm{PB}}\simeq 0.135\mathrm{V}}$. This is a nonlinear mean-field estimate under explicit assumptions, not a unique experimentally determined potential: compact interfacial layers, finite ion size and surface chemistry were not supplied. The source's normalization problem and its use of a linear formula far outside the small-potential regime are separate issues.

Let $\epsilon ={\epsilon }_0{\epsilon }_r$ be the permittivity, $\beta =(k_{B}T{)}^{-1}$, $e>0$ the elementary charge, and $c$ the bulk salt formula-unit number density. The Boltzmann distribution givesConsequently the exterior Poisson-Boltzmann equation isFor small $Q$, meaning $2\beta e|\varphi (a)|\ll 1$, linearize the exponentials. The Debye–Hückel approximation givesThis is also ${\kappa }^2=\beta e^2{\sum }_i{z}_i^2{n}_{i,\infty }/\epsilon$: the divalent cation contributes $4c$ and the two monovalent anions contribute $2c$. In terms of molar salt concentration $C$ in $\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$, replace $c$ by $N_{A}C$; if $C$ is in $\mathrm{mol}{\mathrm{L}}^{-1}$, use $c=10^3{N}_{A}C$. The molar ionic strength is $3C$ in the same concentration units.

The boundary conditions are $\varphi (\infty )=0$ and, by Gauss's law,Here the surface charge is uniform and the spherically symmetric interior field is zero. Set $u=r\varphi$; the radial equation reduces to $u^{\prime \prime }={\kappa }^{2}u$. Decay excludes the growing exponential, so write $\varphi =B{e}^{-\kappa (r-a)}/r$. Then ${\varphi }^{\prime }(a)=-B(1+\kappa a)/a^2$, givingIt solves the linearized Poisson-Boltzmann equation, not the full nonlinear equation at finite $Q$. The radial ion profiles, consistently to first order, areThe exponential Boltzmann distribution formulas above express the full mean-field relation, but substituting a linearized potential into them is accurate only to the retained order. A useful electroneutrality check isThe result is the Debye-Hückel potential of a charged sphere.

Write $\epsilon ={\epsilon }_0{\epsilon }_r$ and take $n_0$ to be the reservoir density of each monovalent ion species. Equal electrochemical potentials in equilibrium give the Boltzmann ion densities in a symmetric electrolyte,Combining this with the electrostatic Poisson equation gives the planar Poisson-Boltzmann equation,The Debye length is ${\kappa }^{-1}$. If the symbol $n_0$ instead denotes the combined density of both species, the factor two is absent; the per-species convention above makes the normalization explicit. At $|e\psi |\ll k_{B}T$, the linearized planar screening solution obeys ${\psi }^{\prime \prime }={\kappa }^2\psi$. With $\psi (0)=\zeta <0$ and $\psi (\infty )=0$,

The positive ions are counterions and the negative ions are co-ions. At weak potential,They approach $n_0$ from above and below respectively, with equal first-order excess and deficit. For stronger negative potential, interpret the source's strong-potential comparison as a statement about $|e\psi |$, since $\psi$ itself is negative. Counterions become strongly concentrated near the wall, while co-ions are exponentially depleted and remain nonnegative. Linearization misses this asymmetry and would eventually predict unphysical negative co-ion density. Point-ion mean-field theory itself eventually needs finite-size and correlation corrections; it provides no steric cap at arbitrarily large counterion concentration.

For steady tangential electro-osmosis, with no imposed pressure gradient and negligible inertia, the Stokes equation is $\eta v^{\prime \prime }+{\rho }_{e}E=0$. Since ${\rho }_e=-\epsilon {\psi }^{\prime \prime }$,The conditions $v(0)=0$ and $v^{\prime }(\infty )=0$ giveThe printed constant speed is the bulk velocity outside the double layer, not the velocity at the no-slip wall. With negative $\zeta$ the positive counterion excess drives fluid along the applied field. The far-field value is the Helmholtz-Smoluchowski electro-osmotic velocity.^[ref]

For the finite channel, first model the added wall as an ideally uncharged insulating boundary with no normal field on its outer side: ${\psi }^{\prime }(d)=0$, while $\psi (0)=\zeta$. The one-charged-wall electro-osmotic channel then hasIntegrating the same force balance and enforcing $v(0)=v(d)=0$ givesFor $U>0$, the maximum occurs atIn that limit $v/U\simeq 1-x/d-e^{-\kappa x}$: the velocity rises rapidly from zero at the charged wall, reaches a maximum a few screening lengths away, then falls approximately linearly to zero at the neutral wall. One charged wall does not give a symmetric plug across a channel with no-slip at the other wall.