Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gtss.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!bellcore!allegra!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!cbosgd!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!gtss!chas
From: chas@gtss.UUCP (Charles Cleveland)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: A question about physics and NOT metaphysics
Message-ID: <111@gtss.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-May-85 10:33:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: gtss.111
Posted: Thu May  9 10:33:32 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 13-May-85 00:03:36 EDT
References: <1397@mtx5b.UUCP>
Reply-To: chas@gtss.UUCP (Charles Cleveland)
Organization: Georgia Tech Surface Studies
Lines: 37
Summary: This is really about specific heats.

Followup-To:net.physics 
Keywords:specific heats, metallic glasses, ceramics

In article <1397@mtx5b.UUCP> mat@mtx5b.UUCP (Mark Terribile) writes:
>I hope that a question about real things in the real world isn't out of
>place here.
>
>	Consider the specific heat of various materials.  The specific
>heat of metals is very low ... approximately one fifth to one tenth that of
>water.  Ceramics and glassy materials have specific heats that are
>approximately the specific heat of water, give or take a factor of one part
>in three.
>
>	Now it is possible to take certain metals in the molten phase and
>cool them very rapidly, as by spraying them against a rotating wheel cooled
>by liquid nitrogen.  The result is an amorphous, non-crystaline solid made
>from the metal in question: a metallic glass.
>
>	Is the specific heat of such a material more reminiscent of the
>specific heat of the metallic phase of the material, or is it reminiscent
>of the specific heat of glass?

If you examine specific heats in some reasonable units (such as calories
per degree kelvin per atom) you will find that there is no systematic
variation is specific heats as one moves between materials belonging
to the classes you consider.  Thus it is unsurprising that the specific
heat of a metallic glass is about the same as that of a metallic liquid
or a metallic crystal or water or a stained-glass window.  The variations
do not particularly have to do with crystalline vs. amorphous or insulator
vs. conductor.  These are about room temperature considerations (specific
heat dominated by 'lattice vibrations'.
If someone undertakes such a comparison and disagrees, I would be interested
to hear about it.  I only spent about 15 minutes looking at the numbers,
although the result seems reasonable to me.
-- 
Charles Cleveland			 Georgia Tech Surface Studies
Georgia Tech School of Physics
Atlanta, GA 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gtss!chas
...!{rlgvax,sb1,uf-cgrl,unmvax,ut-sally}!gatech!gtss!chas