New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Scientists discover why gold doesn’t ‘rust’

Gold doesn’t tarnish like similar metals do. A new paper says that the key is the intricate “herringbone” pattern of its atoms.

A mosaic herringbone pattern of black, grey, and a few panels of gold.

iStock/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

All that glitters is not gold, but gold sure does glitter, holding a shine far longer than most metals. And now two researchers have explained why.

In a paper published today in Physical Review Letters, Santu Biswas and Matthew Montemore of Tulane University reveal the reason gold is harder to oxidize than similar metals. They key, they say, is the same chemical trickery that gives it a beautiful zigzag structure when viewed under a scanning tunneling microscope.

“Everyone knows that gold is difficult to oxidize,” Biswas says. “The thing is, why? What is the proper reason for that?”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Oxidation is the process in which oxygen (or another element, such as sulfur) reacts with a metal and attaches to its surface. For iron, we call this buildup of bonded oxygen “rust,” while oxidation of other metals is referred to as “tarnish.” How easily oxygen sticks to a metal depends on how well the metal’s atomic structure holds onto electrons. In particular, gold treasures its electrons and spurns donations from outside, preserving its shine and making it a cherished material for jewelry and various industrial applications.

But gold’s close clutch of electrons isn’t enough to explain just how reticent it is to oxidize. Biswas and Montemore suspected that the additional reason for gold’s near invulnerability involved the strange way it behaves when you break it. Cleave a chunk of gold, and the newly exposed face will microscopically reshape itself in seconds. The atoms rearrange themselves to produce a zigzagging “herringbone” pattern—a phenomenon called “surface reconstruction.”

The authors calculated the energy required to oxidize gold before and after this unusual reshuffling. They found that oxygen molecules from the air—which are each composed of two oxygen atoms bonded together—more easily break apart and adhere to the gold atoms on the surface before the pattern is reestablished. The reaction requires much less energy in the brief instant that a new surface is exposed.

Physically, the reconstruction pulls more gold atoms out from the bulk of the metal, jamming them into the surface and turning a simple, square-shaped atomic lattice into a denser hexagonal shape—which gives rise to the pattern of bumps and ridges. The reconstruction brings gold’s surface closer to thermodynamic equilibrium, making it easier for the metal’s atoms to exchange heat with one another. But the flip side is that it’s harder for oxygen to wedge itself into the mix.

The team thinks its finding may be a boon to chemists. “You can prevent reconstruction by putting some absorbent on top of the surface,” Biswas says. “And then the gold can easily oxidize.” This could make the use of gold surfaces a new way to capture oxygen from gases, which is important for keeping gases pure.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe