[HN Gopher] Whitest paint is now thin enough to coat cars and pl...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Whitest paint is now thin enough to coat cars and planes
        
       Author : bilsbie
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2022-10-04 18:50 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (newatlas.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (newatlas.com)
        
       | daveslash wrote:
       | Re >> _" with an ability to reflect around 98% of incoming
       | sunlight"_
       | 
       | Seems like a mirror would reflect even more light. Now, obviously
       | we don't want to make the exteriors of our buildings and cars a
       | _mirror!_. but it made me wonder: What 's the difference between
       | a _really really really_ white paint that reflects 98%+ light,
       | vs. a reflective surface? Is it that the white paint reflects the
       | light, but in a  "scrambled" form, thus losing the image?
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | To make things simple, yes, that's is. White "scrambles" the
         | light, the correct term is "diffuses" but that's the idea.
         | 
         | Maybe quantum physicists will disagree but the difference
         | between a mirror and a white surface is that a mirror is
         | perfectly flat and therefore will reflect light at always the
         | same angle. It may absorb some of it, or even most of it (black
         | mirror!) but what it reflects, it will do it always the same
         | way.
         | 
         | A white painted surface can be thought as a surface covered in
         | tiny mirrors, all pointed in a different direction, and
         | depending on which tiny mirror a ray of light will hit, it will
         | be reflected in a different direction. With large pieces, like
         | with a broken mirror, you will still see (as you said)
         | scrambled images. But because the pieces are so tiny, you won't
         | be able to make out an image and you will only see white. A
         | glass pane can look like a mirror, but reduce it to a powder
         | and it becomes white. It has nothing to do with absorption, you
         | can have a 1% reflective mirror, and 100% reflective diffuse
         | white.
         | 
         | The way the "tiny mirrors" that make up the white paint are
         | oriented give out its general look. Have them oriented mostly
         | with the surface and you get a glossy finish, have them
         | randomly oriented in many directions and you get a matte finish
         | (this is called specular reflection btw).
         | 
         | I've seen mirrors be called "smart white", it is white because
         | it reflects most light in most wavelengths, and it is smart
         | because it keeps the rays of light oriented.
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | Yes, it's not reflecting the light so much as re-radiating it
         | in a diffuse pattern.
        
           | thehappypm wrote:
           | I don't think there's a physical difference between
           | reflection and re-radiation, is there? Reflection is just
           | highly organized/non-diffuse.
        
             | Fronzie wrote:
             | reflection is coherent, a single physical process. The
             | light keeps it's phase and polarization. Re-radiation is
             | incoherent, caused by multiple particle interactions
             | (physical processes). So there's quite a difference in
             | physics.
        
               | thehappypm wrote:
               | Can you explain? As I understand it, in both cases, a
               | photon comes in, gets absorbed by the material, and then
               | gets re emitted.
        
         | njdvndsjkvn wrote:
         | yes. A white surface scatters the photons and a reflective one
         | keeps them in the same position relative to the others. If you
         | make a surface smooth enough it starts becoming partly
         | reflective. There is also scattering of photons that happens in
         | object itself
         | 
         | I found this video about the topic to be interesting:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n_otIs6z6E (title: Why aren't
         | Mirrors White? Why isn't EVERYTHING a Mirror?)
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | Nope.
         | 
         | Silver reflectivity is about 95%, aluminum reflectivity is
         | about 90%.
         | 
         | So the best metallic mirrors are worse than the best white
         | paints, even if they can be better than the frequently used
         | white paints based on titanium white (89.5% reflectivity).
         | 
         | Total internal reflection might be closer to 100%, but that
         | cannot be used for the light that comes from the air on the
         | surface of a mirror.
        
           | floxy wrote:
           | You can have dielectric coatings on a mirror that increase
           | the reflectivity to >99.9% (and over a wide range of
           | wavelengths). You can of course get a lot more 9's if you
           | only care about a narrow band.
           | 
           | https://materion.com/products/precision-
           | optics/application-f...
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_mirror
        
             | adrian_b wrote:
             | 99.9% for visible light does not mean 99.9% for all the
             | solar light.
             | 
             | Most dielectric coatings absorb ultraviolet light so they
             | reflect much less of the total solar light, most likely
             | less than 90%.
             | 
             | Such a mirror with dielectric coatings would not be able to
             | cool the object on which it is applied, unlike the paints
             | which are discussed in the article, which are based on
             | boron nitride, barium sulfate, calcium carbonate or
             | fluorinated polymers, all of which do not absorb
             | ultraviolet light.
             | 
             | The common white paints based on titanium white or zinc
             | white also absorb ultraviolet light, so they cannot be used
             | for cooling an object illuminated by the Sun.
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | What I've seen says silver and aluminium are both a bit
           | better than that.
           | 
           | https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Reflectance-versus-
           | wavel...
           | 
           | https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Reflectance-of-Ag-Au-
           | and...
           | 
           | I think this better fits my observation that a clean mirror
           | can easily be unnoticed in an environment similar in all
           | directions, such as woodland or a messy room.
        
             | adrian_b wrote:
             | What counts is not the peak reflectivity from those graphs,
             | but the integrals over the solar spectrum.
             | 
             | Aluminum has lower reflectivity everywhere, but it retains
             | a high reflectivity in ultraviolet.
             | 
             | Silver absorbs ultraviolet, which lowers the integrated
             | reflectivity over the complete spectrum.
             | 
             | A few percent difference in the total reflectivity can make
             | a large difference in the cooling power of a paint, but a
             | few percent difference in the reflectivity of a mirror is
             | unlikely to be perceived visually.
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | Fair, I was only thinking of the visual spectrum and in
               | this context that's not right. :)
        
           | njdvndsjkvn wrote:
           | A simple way to verify this is to observe that common mirrors
           | also tend to be green, showing that the other colors are
           | absorbed more by the mirror. If you face two mirrors towards
           | each other you will see a lot of green.
           | 
           | edit: here's an example: https://i.imgur.com/Ar80FYZ.jpeg
        
             | adrian_b wrote:
             | The common mirrors have the metal on the back side, so
             | their reflectivity is diminished by the absorption in the
             | glass.
             | 
             | The better mirrors, which are used e.g. in telescopes and
             | some other optical instruments, have the metal on the front
             | side, but that limits the metal choice to aluminum, because
             | silver is tarnished quickly by the sulfur compounds present
             | in the air.
        
               | njdvndsjkvn wrote:
               | so why don't common mirrors just use aluminum? It's
               | already cheaper than silver, right?
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | The common mirrors have been using aluminum for a long
               | time.
               | 
               | I do not know when aluminum has replaced silver, but it
               | was probably not a long time after WW2.
               | 
               | The silver mirrors had the advantage that the metal could
               | be easily deposited from a water solution, anyone could
               | make silver mirrors at home, if desired.
               | 
               | The aluminum mirrors use a vacuum deposition process,
               | which requires very expensive equipment, but the cost per
               | mirror is much less.
        
               | njdvndsjkvn wrote:
               | Ah. I misunderstood your earlier comment. Thanks!
        
       | bilsbie wrote:
       | Couldn't this be revolutionary for spacecraft?
       | 
       | Also would it make a better solar sail?
        
         | detritus wrote:
         | Colour me stupid, but in a simple white vs. black comparison,
         | wouldn't a VantaBlack-clad solar sail absorb more energy, so be
         | more useful?
         | 
         | - ed I'm misunderestimating 'equal and opposite' photon
         | reflections here, aren't I?
        
           | twawaaay wrote:
           | For solar sail you don't want to absorb, you want to reflect.
           | 
           | When you absorb you only get half of the push (assuming
           | reflective surface reflecting directly back at 100%
           | efficiency vs absorbed heat that gets radiated
           | omnidirectionally).
        
       | ahazred8ta wrote:
       | Boron nitride and barium sulfate pigment.
        
       | crayboff wrote:
       | I know nothing about this sort of stuff, but if this were applied
       | to cars, would there be an increased risk of temporarily blinding
       | other drivers on a sunny day?
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | It won't shine any brighter than the light that's hitting it.
        
           | lpghatguy wrote:
           | Like... the sun?
        
           | twawaaay wrote:
           | Still, snow can cause blindness:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photokeratitis
        
         | tlb wrote:
         | It reflects something like 98% of light instead of 90%, so the
         | actual increase in reflected light isn't that big.
         | 
         | Flat scattering surfaces are never blinding. The problem is
         | with specular reflections off of shiny surfaces. Even though a
         | shiny surface may only reflect a small fraction of incident
         | light, it's all pointing in one direction which can dazzle
         | observers.
        
         | aliqot wrote:
         | How does it affect white balancing on traffic cameras?
        
       | tobyjsullivan wrote:
       | > The new material features boron nitride in hexagonal
       | nanoplatelet form and offers a solar reflectance of 97.9%
       | 
       | What's the difference between white paint and a mirror? Scatter?
        
         | zmgsabst wrote:
         | Yep -- mirrors are coherent while white paints scatter, even
         | though they reflect similar amounts of light.
        
         | colanderman wrote:
         | Yes, exactly.
        
       | Ancalagon wrote:
       | Very cool, but im skeptical about cost
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | With less than 300 grams of paint per square meter and a
         | pigment made from cheap ingredients, it is unlikely to be more
         | expensive than titanium white, but obviously this will be true
         | only if it will be produced in large enough quantities.
        
       | theandrewbailey wrote:
       | If this takes over and is used everywhere, in 50 years, will
       | people become nostalgic over titanium dioxide white? Will the
       | titanium industry be supported by the few remaining vintage white
       | paint manufacturers? \s
        
         | twawaaay wrote:
         | I think people will in fact get nostalgic about titanium
         | dioxide white. Actually any white. Looking at the progress, in
         | 50 years every surface is going to be covered with ads.
        
       | c7b wrote:
       | Are airplanes more in need of cooling or heating? The outside
       | temperature at cruising altitude is around -50deg (roughly where
       | the Celsius and Fahrenheit scales meet, btw), is the insulation
       | good enough to just keep the inside at acceptable temperatures
       | for humans?
        
         | chuzz wrote:
         | The article mentions airplanes waiting on the ground, but I do
         | wonder what happens during flight. I suppose the engines create
         | plenty of heat after all.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | twawaaay wrote:
         | It does not matter for airplanes. Both cooling and heating are
         | in ample supply on an airplane.
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | It's things like this that have the potential to have big
       | effects. Savings to cooling will directly improve energy
       | efficiency and thus CO2 production.
        
         | gonz0p0litik wrote:
         | Reflected heat has to go somewhere. Thermodynamics has not
         | stepped aside in deference to our social philosophy.
         | 
         | Every textile, screw, and drink cart on a plane is part of
         | toxic industrial feedback loop.
         | 
         | High five to us for externalizing on the future coping with the
         | mess of our vanity projects.
        
           | wffurr wrote:
           | Back into space. Seems fine.
        
             | njdvndsjkvn wrote:
             | Back _towards_ space is more accurate. Some of the light
             | will bounce back to the earth because of the greenhouse
             | effect.
             | 
             | edit: This doesn't mean that the paint isn't effective for
             | what the researchers want it to do, in case that wasn't
             | clear
        
           | colanderman wrote:
           | Yes, it goes somewhere where we don't feel the need to spend
           | energy moving it away from.
        
             | gonz0p0litik wrote:
             | Into buildings and cities made of concrete and steel. So
             | we'll spend less cooling planes and cars and more cooling
             | urban areas. Oh but if we paint everything with it
             | sunglasses sales will skyrocket! Buy Oakley!!
             | 
             | This country gives zero fucks about the government storing
             | kids in cages, why expect any better than "ignore and
             | deflect responsibility to anything but my short term
             | material comfort".
             | 
             | The kids will have every right to drug us future old
             | geezers up and sit us in front of an AI mumbling 2000s era
             | white noise.
        
               | colanderman wrote:
               | Buildings subtend a very small solid angle relative to
               | the earth and the sky most anywhere I drive (and I live
               | in a major metropolitan area).
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | I would assume that cooling buildings is more efficient
               | than cooling small cars and planes. Buildings can, for
               | example, use a ground source heat pump, which isn't an
               | option for vehicles.
               | 
               | I also have to assume that a perfect reflection from the
               | top of a car or a plane just sends the radiation out into
               | space.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | > Reflected heat has to go somewhere.
           | 
           | Back out to space, where it came from.
        
       | jamesgreenleaf wrote:
       | If you mixed it with Vantablack, would you get the greyest
       | possible paint? /s
        
         | WallyFunk wrote:
         | You could try buying some and find out!
         | 
         | https://culturehustle.com/products/black-v1-0-beta-the-world...
         | 
         | You could also mix it with the 'whitest white'
         | 
         | https://culturehustle.com/products/white-20
        
           | dfxm12 wrote:
           | You linked to black 2.0. It may very well be the blackest
           | black, but it is decidedly not Vantablack. I think this is
           | worth distinguishing, because interestingly, I don't think
           | just anyone can get their hands on Vantablack because someone
           | obtained exclusive rights to it. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/
           | wiki/Stuart_Semple#Conflict_with_An...
        
         | twawaaay wrote:
         | You can't mix Vantablack. It actually isn't paint, it is a
         | coating grown through vapour deposition.
        
       | RetpolineDrama wrote:
       | The future is now, and it is blinding!
        
       | chris_st wrote:
       | Finally, we can make the city in Mirror's Edge [1] into reality!
       | 
       | 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror%27s_Edge
        
       | metadat wrote:
       | How does this new paint compare to the contents of a spray paint
       | can from Home Depot?
       | 
       | Having a hard time searching the web for this one, the first few
       | pages of hits are all about this new 98.1% paint.
        
         | zmgsabst wrote:
         | You're looking for something called "light reflectance value"
         | or LRV.
         | 
         | You can get 90-94% in wall paints; not sure about spray paints.
         | 
         | https://www.kylieminteriors.ca/paint-colour-review-the-5-whi...
        
       | crazygringo wrote:
       | I know white clothing often contains "brighteners" which
       | fluoresce, converting received UV light into visible wavelengths,
       | so the resulting white is brighter than what is reflected in the
       | visible spectrum.
       | 
       | I'm just curious what role that ever plays in paint, if this 98%
       | reflectivity is a big deal, or if we already have white paint
       | with over 100% because of brighteners.
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | This 98% reflectivity refers to the total solar light,
         | including infrared and ultraviolet light, because the purpose
         | is to cool whatever is painted, despite being illuminated by
         | the Sun.
         | 
         | With fluorescent paints, the energy of the emitted visible
         | light is always less than the energy of the absorbed
         | ultraviolet light. The difference is heat that warms the paint.
         | 
         | The paints discussed in the article also reflect the
         | ultraviolet light. Moreover, they also emit infrared light in
         | the frequency band where the air is transparent, and that
         | infrared light leaves the Earth if the painted object is
         | outdoors, which will be true for a building or for a car while
         | it is used. By emitting more energy than it is absorbed from
         | the solar light, the painted object is cooled (if it is
         | outdoors).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-04 23:02 UTC)