Low-Energy Electrons in Astrochemistry

Low-Energy Electrons in
Astrochemistry
Chris Arumainayagam
Wellesley College
electron
stimulated
desorption
Low-Energy (220 eV)
electrons
D(C‒O) ≈ 3.5 eV
postirradiation
analysis
~20-200 Å
CH3OH,NH3,H2O
Ta(110)
P = 1109 Torr
T = 90 K
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2010,12, 5947-5969
DOI: 10.1039/B917005G
Our Hypothesis
Low-energy electrons (< 20 ev)
could play a significant role in
the
synthesis
of
“complex”
organic
molecules
previously
thought to form exclusively via
photons
Formation of secondary electrons in
cosmic ices and dust grains
secondary electron
cascade (0-20 eV)
thin (~ 100 ML) ice
layers (10 K)
Cosmic ray
107-1020 eV
bare silicaceous or
carbonaceous
interstellar dust grain
Importance of Low-Energy Electrons
Secondary Electron “Tail”
Dissociation Cross-Section
Dissociation Yield
1 MeV particle → 100,000
low-energy electrons
DEA Resonances
Ionization
and
Excitation
C. Arumainayagam et al., Surface Science Reports 65 (2010) 1‒44.
Electron-induced
dissociation mechanisms
Electron Impact
Excitation
> 3 eV
AB + e–
Electron
Attachment
AB* + e–
Autodetachment
Dissociative
Attachment
AB–*
Associative
Attachment
< 15 eV
Electron
Impact
Ionization
~ 10 eV
Dipolar
Dissociation
AB+*
+
2e–
Fragmentation
A* + B
A+ + B–
AB + energy
A●+ B–
AB– + energy
A● + B+*
How to break a 5 eV bond with a 3 eV electron?
“Thermodynamic Threshold”
AB +

e-
 A +
*
B
H  (B )  D(A  B)  EA(B)
Another Key Difference
between Photons and Electrons
LUMO
hν
HOMO
LUMO
π*
π*
n
n
π
π
π*
π*
e–
HOMO
n
n
π
π
Low-energy
electron-induced
radiolysis in
cosmic ices
radical formation
CH3OH*
excitation
CH3OH
low-energy
electron
radical-radical reactions
H, CH2OH, CH3O
HOCH2CH2OH
0.14
Experimental Procedures
0.10
0.08
0.06
Irradiated
0.04
0.02
0.00
Liquid N2 Port
Time (sec)
e-
Mass Spec
Ta(110)
Post-Irradiation Temperature
Programmed Desorption
Temperature (K)
Nonirradiated
-0.02
4000
3500
3000
Methanol
2500
2000
1500
1
Wavenumbers (cm )
Filament
Products
Mass Spec Signal
IRAS
0.12
Intensity
Mass Spec Signal
Isothermal Electron
Stimulated Desorption
Power
Supply
1000
PART I
RADIOLYSIS OF METHANOL
Post-Irradiation Temperature-Programmed Desorption
12CH OH on Mo(110)
3
C.R. Arumainayagam, et. al. J. Phys. Chem., 99 (1995) 9530
Conclusion 1
Post-irradiation temperature
programmed desorption is
useful for identifying labile
radiolysis products (e.g.,
CH3OCH2OH)
Methoxymethanol Yield (Arb. Units)
Radiolysis Yield vs. Incident Electron Energy
Methoxymethanol: CH3OCH2OH (m/e = 61)
CH3O● +
1.80E+008
●CH₂OH
→ CH3OCH₂OH
1.60E+008
1.40E+008
1.20E+008
1.00E+008
8.00E+007
Threshold: 6 – 7 eV
6.00E+007
4.00E+007
2.00E+007
0.00E+000
-2.00E+007
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Electron Energy (eV)
Boyer, Boamah, Sullivan, Arumainayagam, Bass, Sanche, (J. Phys. Chem. C, 2014, 118, 22592-22600)
Conclusion 2
•
Dissociative electron attachment may
not play an importance role in
radiation-induced chemical synthesis
reactions of methanol
•
Radical-radical reactions are the likely
mechanism for the formation of ethylene
glycol and methoxymethanol
•
Barrier-less radical-radical reactions
may be rapid in interstellar ices
because of the low temperatures (10 to
100 K).
Methanol Radicals
Radical 1
•CH2OH
•HCO
CH3O•
•CH3
•OH
•H
•CH2OH
HOCH2CH2OH
Ethylene Glycol
CH2OHCHO
Glycolaldehyde
CH3OCH2OH
Methoxymethanol
CH3CH2OH
Ethanol
HOCH2OH
Methylene Glycol
CH3OH
Methanol
•HCO
CH2OHCHO
Glycolaldehyde
CHOCHO
Glyoxal
CH3OCHO
Methyl Formate
CH3CHO
Acetaldehyde
HCOOH
Formic Acid
H2CO
Formaldehyde
CH3O•
CH3OCH2OH
Methoxymethanol
CH3OCHO
Methyl Formate
CH3OOCH3
Dimethyl Peroxide
CH3OCH3
Dimethyl Ether
CH3OOH
Methyl
Hydroperoxide
CH3OH
Methanol
•CH3
CH3CH2OH
Ethanol
CH3CHO
Acetaldehyde
CH3OCH3
Dimethyl Ether
CH3CH3
Ethane
CH3OH
Methanol
CH4
Methane
•OH
HOCH2OH
Methylene Glycol
HCOOH
Formic Acid
CH3OOH
Methyl
Hydroperoxide
CH3OH
Methanol
HOOH
Hydrogen Peroxide
H2O
Water
•H
CH3OH
Methanol
H2CO
Formaldehyde
CH3OH
Methanol
CH4
Methane
H2O
Water
H2
Dihydrogen
Radical 2
What is the difference between a photon and an electron?
•CH2OH
H2CO
HCO
CO
CO2
CH4
HCOOH
CH3OCHO
CH3OCH3
HOCH2CH2OH
CH3OCH2OH
HCOCH2OH
CH3CH2OH
C2H6
CH3CHO
CH3COOH
Electrons
(≤20 eV)
UV
Study1




























1Oberg
et. al. (A&A
504, 891–913 (2009))
Conclusion 3
•
Post-irradiation temperature programmed
desorption can be used to identify components
in a complex mixture of radiolysis products
•
The identified electron-induced methanol
radiolysis products include many that have
been previously identified as being formed
by methanol UV photolysis in the
interstellar medium
•
Post-irradiation temperature programmed
desorption results cannot be used to
conclude if identified products are nascent
radiolysis products
Irradiated Methanol: IRAS Product Analysis
100 monolayers CH3OH at 90 K irradiated with 14 eV electrons 2400 µC
Sullivan, Boamah, Shulenberger, Chapman, Atkinson, Boyer, Arumainayagam;
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw593)
Conclusion 4
• Thermal processing above 90 K not
necessary for product formation
• IRAS not as effective as TPD for
identifying species in complex
product mixture
PART II
RADIOLYSIS OF AMMONIA
Why study ammonia?
Öberg, K., et al. “The Spitzer Ice Legacy: Ice Evolution from cores to protostars.” The Astrophysical Journal 740(2011): 16 pp.
Possible Radiolysis Products of Ammonia
Hydrazine
N-3 Species
Diazene
N-2 Species
Detection of Hydrazine and Diazene
at High Incident Electron Energies
Mass
Signal
Signal
Spec
SpecSignal
Mass
MassSpec
N2D4
Film Thickness: 100 ML
Electron Energy: 1000 eV
Electron Dose: 8.5 C
ND3
3
N2D2
+
m/z 36 (N22D44+)
2 4
+
m/z 34 (N22D33++)
2 3
+
m/z 32 (N22D22++)
2 2
100
100
150
150
200
200
250
250
300
300
350
350
400
400
450
450
500
500
Temperature (K)
Katie Shulenberger `14 (Wellesely College)
Radiolysis Products of Ammonia
Hydrazine (N2H4)
+
Diazene (N2H2)
*
●NH + ●NH
●
●
+ H2
Zheng, W. et al. The Astrophysical Journal. 674:1242-1250, 2008 February 20
Model: Bimolecular Intermediate Step
𝑅
𝐼+𝐼
𝒅𝑹
= −𝒌𝟏 𝑹
𝒅𝒕
𝒅𝑰
= 𝒌𝟏 𝑹 − 𝒌𝟐 𝑰𝟐
𝒅𝒕
𝒅𝑷 𝒌𝟐 𝟐
=
𝑰
𝒅𝒕
𝟐
𝑘1
𝐼
𝑘2
𝑃
𝑹(𝒕) = 𝑹𝟎 𝒆−𝒌𝟏𝒕
𝑰 𝒕 =?
Katherine Tran ’15
(Wellesley College)
𝑷 𝒕 =?
Results: Yield vs Fluence
Hydrazine Yield
Film Thickness: 500 ML
Electron Energy: 1000 eV
Transmitted Current: 3.3A
-- k1 = 0.15 s-1; k2 = 40 cm2s-1molecule-1
0
100
200
300
Fluence (C/cm2 )
400
500
Hydrazine Yield
Results: Yield vs Film Thickness
Electron Energy: 1000 eV
Dose Rate: 0.33 C/s
Electron Dose: 33 C
0
50
100
150
Film Thickness (ML)
200
Results: Low Energy Experiments
Leon Sanche, Andrew Bass &
Sasan Esmaili
Final Conclusions
• Low-energy (< 20 eV) electroninduced condensed phase reactions
may contribute to the interstellar
synthesis of “complex” molecules
previously
thought
to
form
exclusively via UV photons
• Molecules such as methoxymethanol
may serve as tracer molecules for
the differences between photon- and
electron-induced reactions.
Acknowledgements
Former Lab Members
Collaborators
Dr. Léon Sanche, Université de Sherbrooke
Dr. Andrew Bass, Université de Sherbrooke
Dr. Petra Swiderek, University of Bremen
Dr. Michael Boyer, Clark University
Funding Source
Current Lab Members
National Science Foundation
(CHE-1465161, CHE-1012674, and CHE
1005032)
Jane Zhu
Clarissa Verish
Helen Cumberbatch
Julia Lukens
Zoe Peeler
Alice Zhou
Jyoti Campbell
Kendra Cui
Mebatsion Gebre
Jean Huang
Hope Schneider
Aida Abou-Zamzam
Ally Bao
Christina Buffo
Eliana Marosica
Leslie Gates
Mayla Thompson
Rachel Kim
Rhoda Tano-Menka
Stephanie Villafane
Subha Baniya