Note 21 — Chapter XVIII · SILICON AND THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE FOURTH GROUP

For us the latter have not a saline character, only because they are not regarded from this point of view, but an alloy of sodium and zinc is, in a broad sense, a salt in many of its reactions, for it is subject to the same double decompositions as sodium phosphide or sulphide, which clearly have saline properties. The latter (sodium phosphide), when heated with ethyl iodide, forms ethyl phosphide, and the former—i.e. the alloy of zinc and sodium—gives zinc ethyl; that is, the element (P, S, Zn) which was united with the sodium passes into combination with the ethyl: RNa + EtI = REt + NaI. By combining sodium successively with chlorine, sulphur, phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, tin, and zinc, we obtain substances having less and less the ordinary appearance of salts, but if the alloy of sodium and zinc cannot be termed a salt, then perhaps this name cannot be given to sodium sulphide, and the compounds of sodium with phosphorus. The following circumstance may also be observed: with chlorine, sodium gives only one compound (with oxygen, at the most three), with sulphur five, with phosphorus probably still more, with antimony naturally still more, and the more analogous an element is to sodium, the more varied are the proportions in which it is able to combine with it, the less are the alterations in the properties which take place by this combination, and the nearer does the compound formed approach to the class of compounds known as indefinite chemical compounds. In this sense a siliceous alloy, containing silica and other acids, is a salt. The oxide to a certain extent plays the same part as the sodium, whilst the silica plays the part of the acid element which was taken up successively by zinc, phosphorus, sulphur, &c., in the above examples. Such a comparison of the silica compounds with alloys presents the great advantage of including under one category the definite and indefinite silica compounds which are so analogous in composition—that is, brings under one head such crystalline substances as certain minerals, and such amorphous substances as are frequently met with in nature, and are artificially prepared, as glass, slags, enamels, &c.

If the compounds of silica are substances like the metallic alloys, then (1) the chemical union between the oxides of which they are composed must be a feeble one, as it is in all compounds formed between analogous substances. In reality such feeble agencies as water and carbonic acid are able, although slowly, to act on and destroy the majority of the complex silica compounds in rocks, as we saw in the preceding chapter; (2) their formation, like that of alloys, should not be accompanied by a considerable alteration of volume; and this is actually the case. For example, felspar has a specific gravity of about 2·6, and therefore, taking its composition to be K₂O,Al₂O₃,6SiO₂, we find its volume, corresponding with this formula, to be 556·8. 2·6 = 214, the volume of K₂O = 35, of Al₂O₃ = 26, and of SiO₂ = 22·6. Hence the sum of the volumes of the component oxides, 35 + 26 + 6 × 22·6 = 196, which is very nearly equal to that of the felspar; that is, its formation is attended by a slight expansion, and not by contraction, as is the case in the majority of other cases when combinations determined by strong affinities are accomplished. In the case in question the same phenomenon is observed as in solutions and alloys—that is, as in cases of feeble affinities. So also the specific gravity of glass is directly dependent on the amount of those oxides which enter into its composition. If in the preceding example we take the sp. gr. of silica to be, not 2·65, but 2·2, its volume = 27·3, and the sum of the volumes will be = 224—that is, greater than that of orthoclase.