Is relative permittivity (εr) set by atomic structure? Decide whether the statement is correct: “The relative permittivity εr of a dielectric is determined by the material’s atomic and molecular structure (i.e., its available polarization mechanisms).”

Introduction / Context:
Relative permittivity εr reflects how a dielectric polarizes under an electric field. Polarization mechanisms arise from the material’s atomic and molecular architecture, making εr fundamentally a structural/material property (albeit frequency- and temperature-dependent).

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Dielectric may exhibit electronic, ionic, and/or orientational (dipolar) polarization.
• Frequency and temperature can modulate the contribution of each mechanism.

Concept / Approach:
Electronic polarization involves displacement of electron clouds relative to nuclei; ionic polarization involves relative motion of ions in lattices; orientational polarization involves alignment of permanent dipoles. Whether a mechanism exists and its strength are governed by chemical bonding, lattice symmetry, and molecular configuration—hence by atomic structure.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Identify available mechanisms from structure (e.g., polar molecules permit orientational polarization).Sum contributions to obtain εr at a given frequency band.Conclude that εr is determined by the material’s atomic/molecular makeup, while also varying with frequency and temperature.

Verification / Alternative check:
Nonpolar polymers have εr ~ 2–3; polar polymers/ceramics can have much higher εr due to dipolar/ionic contributions; ferroelectrics exhibit very high εr near phase transitions—each case is rooted in structure.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Limiting truth to only high or low frequency ignores that structure governs mechanisms across the spectrum; declaring “False” contradicts materials science fundamentals.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing εr (material response) with geometry-dependent capacitance; overlooking dispersion.

Final Answer:
True