The Difference Between an Alloy and an Amalgam - It's Thermoelectric

Printer-friendly versionPDF version

The following statement was made by Professor Xu Wang of the University of Akron in response to a question regarding the relationship between the thermoelectric properties and the electromagnetic behavior of metal amalgam dental fillings.

"Theoretically electromagnetic field will be generated by thermal gradient. But the thermoelectric coupling parameter in most metals is very low (0.001-0.01). So I don't think the induced electromagnetic field is significant enough to influence the neurological tissue nearby."

Amalgams, including dental amalgams, are not like most other metals in at least one crucial respect; they have a much greater degree of material inhomogeneity.

This is true when compared either with pure metals, such as copper, silver, etc., or with true alloys such as brass.

The explanation for the difference in the material homogeneities of amalgams and true alloys lies in the difference between the methods by which the two types of material are formed.

When a true alloy is formed, the component metals are mixed together at a temperature which is greater than the melting point of all of them. Then, after having been mixed thoroughly in its fully liquid state, the mixture is allowed to solidify by cooling at a controlled rate.

By contrast, in an amalgamation process, bits of solid metal, which may themselves be of either pure metal or an alloy, are mixed together with a liquid metal at a temperature which is BELOW THE MELTING POINT of the solid component(s). (And in the case of dental amalgam, where mercury is used as the liquid metal amalgamating agent, this process is normally performed at room temperature.)

In the setting process of such an amalgam, the liquid mercury becomes part of the solid material not as a result of any subsequent reduction in temperature, but by joining in solid solution with the outer layer of the solid particles of metal with which it was mixed. But of course, not all of the volume of the solid particles is involved in this process and, as a result, the microstructure of the resulting solid amalgam is as depicted in the schematic diagram at:

http://book.boot.users.btopenworld.com/setting.htm

In this diagram the lumps of "unreacted alloy" (denoted "gamma") are the cores of the original grains of solid silver-tin alloy which have not mixed with any of the mercury during the amalgamation process.

At this scale it is not possible to show the spatial relationship between the atoms of silver and the atoms of tin in these alloy "cores". The alloy has too great a degree of homogeneity for this to be done.

However, the relative inhomogeneity of the "amalgam" is clearly depicted by the sizes of the unreacted alloy cores. (These being held together by a solid matrix of a dissimilar mixture of metals (denoted "gamma-1") which does have mercury in it, and which may be presumed therefore to have dissimilar physical properies.)

Now, I have it on good authority from Professor David B Mahler of The Oregon Health & Science University School of Dentistry that the median size of the "unreacted" grains of original solid alloy in dental amalgams is in the order of 30 microns. Scientists with experience of electrical phenomena at the nano scale might provide some testimony to the significance of this figure.

The question which remains unanswered is this; whilst it may be appropriate to quote a "coupling parameter" for the local electromagnetic effect arising purely from temperature difference in a homogeneous metallic material, such as a pure metal or an alloy of metals (for example the type of alloy which may be mixed with liquid mercury to form an amalgam), is it not the case that the dominant (and potentially much larger) electromagnetic effect arising as a result of temperature differences in a more inhomogeneous mixture of dissimilar metals, such as an amalgam, is more likely to be that caused by the establishment of thermoelectric eddy currents which would be necessary for maintaining physical equilibrium against temperature gradient in such an inhomogeneous medium?

Can anyone think of any experimental procedure which might be employed in order to demonstrate the case either way?

And is it possible that Professor Wang was failing to take into account the degree of inhomogeneity of metal amalgams, which is much greater than "most metals", when estimating the size of the electromegnetic disturbance produced by thermoelectric effects in dental amalgams?

Professor Wang's home page is at:

http://www.ecgf.uakron.edu/~pan/wang/

Remember, dental amalgam is not a single metal. And it is not even a single alloy. It is an inhomogeneous mixture of dissimilar mixtures of metals. You would expect its thermoelectric behavior to correspond accordingly. (Well I would anyway.)

Keith Walsh

Some follow-up correspondence from usenet newsgroup sci.med.dentistry (search Google Groups):

I am proposing the hypothesis that the degree of electromagnetic disturbance caused by the application of a temperature gradient to an amalgam should be greater than that caused by the application of a
temperature gradient to either a pure metal or a true alloy.

The justification for this proposal is based on the fact that an amalgam has a much greater degree of material inhomogeneity than either a pure metal or an alloy, and it should therefore be expected
to generate internal thermoelectric eddy currents to a much greater extent when subjected to thermal gradients.

Now, Professor Wang of the University of Akron has asserted that the relevant "coupling parameter", which gives an indication of the size of the electromagnetic disturbance generated by a material with
respect to the size of any temperature differential applied to it, would be too low in "most metals" to suggest that any local electromagnetic effect produced could have an influence on neurological tissue in the direct vicinity of the material.

However, as I have shown (and I note that in your own contribution you have not registered any disagreement with this point) amalgams (including dental amalgams) are different from "most metals" in the crucial respect that they have a much greater degree of material inhomogeneity.

So, the question is, how can we be sure that amalgams (and most importantly dental amalgams) come within the "safe" range defined by Professor Wang with regard to electromagnetic activity?

Well there's only one scientific way to do that and that is to carry out experimental investigations to see if the electromagnetic disturbances generated by amalgams as a result of their thermoelectric
behavior can be measured.

And if they can be measured then it would also be necessary to carry out further experimental investigations to determine whether or not the measured disturbances are able to influence the function of any neurological tissue nearby.

According to the established principles of scientific understanding, without any of the experimental investigations here described having been carried out, it is not possible for any of us (including
Professor Wang) to conclude whether or not the natural electromagnetic behavior of an amalgam dental filling is capable of dissipating electrical energy through the nerves in people's heads.

And it is therefore not possible to declare amalgam fillings "safe" in
this respect.

I do not advocate the use of metal amalgams in restorative dentistry.

Professional bodies such as the American Dental Association, the British Dental Association, the US FDA, etc., they do that. And therefore the responsibility for carrying out the experimental procedures to demonstrate whether or not such materials are "safe" for this purpose lies with them, not with me.

Now I appreciate that you have succeeded in convincing yourself that this responsibility does lie with me.

But you are wrong, it doesn't.

Keith P Walsh

Thanks for an interesting article. This topic is interesting for a lot of students. I've also found interesting video about Alloy http://www.tubesfan.com/watch/gallium-aluminum-alloy . It is good that you've mentioned the difference in methods. Otherwise there would be a hot discussion.

Dear Steve11,


Thank you for expressing your interest in this topic.


When the thermoelectric properties and/or behavior of a dental amalgam are estimated by taking into account only the relative percentages of the constituent metals in the bulk material - as might be done in the case of an homogeneous metallic alloy - and at the same time neglecting to take into account the inhomogeneity of the amalgam mixture, then the thermoelectric effects occurring in the material when it is subjected to a temperature gradient may be underestimated.


A basic definition of an alloy is as follows:


"A homogeneous mixture or solid solution of two or more metals, the atoms of one replacing or occupying interstitial positions between the atoms of the other."


In a homogeneous alloy the arrangement described thus is uniform throughout the material on a scale right down to the relative positions of the atoms of the different constituent metallic elements. "Grain boundaries" mark the surfaces where neighboring regions of the material which began to solidify independently from separate points during the solidifying process "meet". The regular pattern in the arrangement of the atoms of the alloyed metals may be discontinuous at the grain boundaries, but the pattern and relative placement/occurrence of the atoms of the different metals is the same at either side of it.


In a dental amalgam, because of the way in which the material is formed, regions of it with dimensions measuring many times greater than the inter-atomic scale have a significantly different constitution to neighboring regions, and it is because of the presence of the interfaces between these dissimilarly constituted regions that you would expect the thermoelectric behavior of a material like dental amalgam to be more pronounced than in a true alloy.


However, not only is dental amalgam an inhomogeneous mixture of dissimilar metals in its own right, but it has also been common practice for dentists to screw metal alloy retaining pins into the root sockets of patients' teeth and then encase the heads of the pins in metal amalgams, thereby creating further conditions for the generation of thermoelectric potentials at the interfaces between the retaining pins (which are not made of amalgam) and the amalgams.


Now, you can read elsewhere in this forum that at least one prominent scientist with a worldwide reputation as an authority on thermoelectric phenomena believes that the thermoelectric potentials arising from a single thermoelectric couple at ordinary temperature differentials are large enough to stimulate nerve fibres in animal tissue (see, "Professor Anatychuk and Volta's Frog's Leg Experiments"), so it would seem reasonable to suggest that the actual thermoelectric behavior of those metals, mixtures of metals, and dissimilar metals in contact with each other which are commonly used in restorative dentistry should have been investigated before being accepted as suitable for their purpose.


In 2007 a team of Czech researchers set out to measure the magnetic susceptibility and electrical resistivity of a range of metallic dental materials (this should really have been done before these materials ever went into service if you ask me).


You can read their report at:


http://book.boot.users.btopenworld.com/Mag_susc__paper.html


At the top of page 717 they list 6 different materials included in the study which are describerd as "Amalgams".


These materials are not amalgams. They are the alloys used to form dental amalgams by mixing them with liquid mercury. (And as a matter of fact it is not obvious from the report that it was actually amalgams that the researchers tested and not simply samples of the alloys that they were supplied with.)


It may be interesting to consider the first "Amalgam" in this list, "Starfill NG2", because it contains 3% mercury.


The complete composition of this alloy is:


Ag - 70%
Cu - 15%
Hg - 3%
Sn - 12%


Although the percentage of mercury is small, this material could be accurately described as "an alloy of mercury with other metals", which is a commonly used but erroneous definition of an amalgam.


Clearly, Starfill NG2 is not an amalgam because it is not possible to form dental amalgam with only 3% mercury. This material is an alloy, solid grains of which must be mixed with a further quantity of liquid mercury in order to form the amalgam.


I would be interested to hear if anyone has ever attempted to measure (rather than guess) the thermoelectricproperties of such a material.


I would also be most interested to hear any opinions arising from your discussions on these matters.


Best regards,


Keith P Walsh