[HN Gopher] A 155 carat diamond with 92 mm diameter (2017)
___________________________________________________________________
A 155 carat diamond with 92 mm diameter (2017)
Author : Tomte
Score : 53 points
Date : 2022-10-27 11:53 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.innovations-report.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.innovations-report.com)
| mhb wrote:
| Paper:
|
| https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315136046_Ion_bomba...
| monkpit wrote:
| https://archive.ph/XT3c5
| userbinator wrote:
| There is no mention of its thickness, but from calculation using
| its mass, and approximating its shape as a cylinder, it's
| approximately 1mm.
|
| Here's a better picture of it:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Single-crystal_CVD_diamon...
| leplen wrote:
| The description in your link has the thickness: Freestanding
| unpolished diamond single crystal synthesized by heteroepitaxy
| on Ir/YSZ/Si(001). The thickness of the disc is 1.6 +- 0.25 mm
| and its weight is 155 carat.
| xhkkffbf wrote:
| What are some of the best and least expensive lab made diamonds
| out there? Not CZ or moissanite but just pure carbon. Any
| opinions?
| makapuf wrote:
| Let's hope this fad of "natural" transparent carbon crystals die
| quickly, as aluminum as a rare metal did. Its extraction,
| transformation and distribution channels deserve to quickly die.
| Isamu wrote:
| The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson is a fun book, where diamond
| becomes an extremely cheap building material due to
| nanotechnology.
| nfriedly wrote:
| Hey, quick question, I just noticed the subtitle of Diamond
| Age is "A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer" - are there
| actually illustrations in the book that I'd be missing if I
| bought the Audiobook rather than a printed copy?
| thfuran wrote:
| I doubt it, though I only have the audiobook. The subtitle
| refers to an in-story book.
| dmitrygr wrote:
| "A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer" is a device (smart book
| for educating) that was created by a character in a book.
| The book itself it not illustrated
| nfriedly wrote:
| Thank you!
| jon_richards wrote:
| One of my favorite moments from that is when the book
| tricks the child into starting to learn to read.
|
| I think we're not far off from needing AI "best friends"
| to raise us and assist us through an increasingly
| complicated world.
| woodwireandfood wrote:
| I don't remember any in the printed version, but it's been
| long enough that I'm not certain.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| The Diamond Age spends a really small amount of time talking
| about actual diamonds. So, while fun, I disagree it's on
| topic here.
|
| (But if you want a book about nanotechnology, yes, it's it.)
| bluedevil2k wrote:
| > extraction, transformation and distribution channels deserve
| to quickly die.
|
| Why? Have any reasons for your belief? There's a reason
| diamonds are expensive and it's not "artificial scarcity" as
| the uneducated people here like to claim. It's because people
| want the diamonds and are willing to pay the expensive prices!
| makestuff wrote:
| Aren't diamonds not even that "rare" relative to other
| gemstones? The only difference is the artificial scarcity with
| diamonds.
| pfdietz wrote:
| Diamonds are actually quite abundant -- hundreds of
| kilometers below the surface of the Earth.
| saxonww wrote:
| not sure about the relative rarity, but De Beers did/does
| artificially limit available stock to keep prices up. If you
| read really anything about them, you'll see that market
| manipulation was core to their business model from the start.
| dylan604 wrote:
| The fact that there's now an ad campaign for Only Natural
| Diamonds just shows how desperate they are.
| nailer wrote:
| I loved how they used 'natural' versus 'mined' to avoid
| focus on environmental issues.
| dylan604 wrote:
| "There's a 10 point bump in exploring vs drilling" --Toby
| Ziegler, White House Communications Director, The West
| Wing
| onion2k wrote:
| The diamond industry generates about $110bn a year
| (although most of that isn't shiny gemstones). You can
| see why companies might be desperately clinging on to
| that...
| samatman wrote:
| By weight, of course, the diamond industry is entirely
| industrial, gems are a rounding error.
|
| By value? Other way around. This source says $1.8B in
| 2018. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-
| analysis/industri...
| Turing_Machine wrote:
| Right. Most diamonds are ugly brown or black things that
| get crushed up for use as industrial abrasives.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Ask the people using diamonds for this purpose if
| "diamonds are forever". I'm guessing a resounding "hell
| no" response.
|
| Denying the manipulation power of marketing is just sheer
| folly.
| bluedevil2k wrote:
| This hasn't been true for 20 years. "The DeBeers monopoly"
| has become the go to argument for Reddit and sadly this far
| more educated forum. DeBeers isn't even the biggest diamond
| producer any more, Alrosa is (Russian government company).
| Alrosa and DeBeers together are around 80% of production,
| so DeBeers no longer has pricing power.
|
| The reason for this - the discovery of diamond mines
| outside the DeBeers stronghold of Southern Africa - Russia,
| Canada, Australia.
|
| DeBeers used to sell their diamonds on a take it or leave
| it style. Cutters could take their sale price or not, but a
| "no" essentially put yourself out of business.
|
| Now rough diamonds are mostly sold via auctions. There's
| about an auction every 1-2 weeks across all the miners, so
| there's always an opportunity for cutters to buy supply,
| and prices are out in the public.
| rocket_surgeron wrote:
| "DeBeers controls the diamond market" is a myth that
| won't die.
|
| As an aside, I've noticed that circle of people who love
| chiming in about diamonds tends to paradoxically overlap
| with the circle of people who think crypto is awesome
| despite the "vibe" of the two being extremely similar.
|
| I've found it best to just let them rage against their
| chosen machine.
| arghwhat wrote:
| The mind boggles at the amount of resources spent on trying to
| distinguish stuff dug out from the ground from stuff made in a
| lab, and "educating" people in this process.
|
| It is such a shame when a person's shiny rock is ever so
| slightly shinier than those that cost lives to dig out of dirt.
| ansible wrote:
| If you take a long hard look at the overall economy, well, we
| waste a lot of time and energy on frivolous things. All in
| the name of supposedly making ourselves feel better. Which of
| those are actually important, and which of those are not? Who
| is to judge?
|
| Some people will only be happy riding actual jet skis, where
| others will be happy riding one in a video game, which uses
| comparatively fewer resources. Should we outlaw or more
| severely regulate actual jet skis? Ditto for other activities
| (horse riding vs Red Dead Redemption 2 or Breath of the
| Wild).
|
| Just for the record, I'd like to see everyone getting out
| there in the real world riding bicycles... but I'm not
| prepared to legislate that as the preferred outdoor activity.
|
| And the same argument can be made for lots of things, from
| suborbital launches to gigantic art projects, to suburban
| cities vs. high-density walkable cities.
|
| We could actually raise up everyone's living standards and
| have them all work less hours per week with some attitude
| adjustment, commonsense regulations and reorienting of our
| national priorities. I don't know when that's going to happen
| though.
| HPsquared wrote:
| It's just self-interest, really. The PR submarine in action.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| For those concerned about distinguishing 'natural' from
| 'synthetic' diamonds (not really that meaningful IMO other than
| maintaining artificial scarcity of a luxury/status item), there's
| a simple fix: use atmospheric carbon as the building material.
| Atmospheric CO2 has trace amounts of carbon-14 (~1 per 10^12 C
| atoms) and the resulting beta-decay-mode emissions can be easily
| easily detected.
|
| Practically, this means the methane fed into the chemical vapor
| deposition process has to be extracted from biogas (say, a
| chicken manure digester) or directly synthesized from air and
| hydrogen (Sabatier process). This feedstock will contain the same
| trace amount of carbon-14 as the atmosphere and will be
| incorporated into the resulting diamond.
|
| This seems like such an obvious thing to do for various reasons.
| It allows the (increasingly irrelevant) natural diamond industry
| to easily distinguish between their product and synthetic
| products. Not only that, there's probably a huge market for such
| 'atmospheric diamonds' among the people interested in green
| products, or tech products. Finally, while the cost of
| synthesizing methane feedstock is still quite a bit higher than
| just using natural gas, that's negligible relative to the cost of
| the final product and shouldn't be a factor.
|
| Time to go write up a business plan, isn't it?
|
| P.S. full paper here:
|
| https://sci-hub.se/10.1038/srep44462
| viggity wrote:
| There is a CVD diamond detector available called Yehuda. It
| makes some sort of distinction based on the phosphorescence.
|
| https://www.riogrande.com/knowledge-hub/videos/how-does-the-...
| ISL wrote:
| If you're trying to forge a diamond to bypass this particular
| technique, one can use methane extracted from the earth.
| nailer wrote:
| Already done, there were atmosphere-carbon diamonds on sale at
| Selfridges corner shop a couple of months back.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Right you are, they seem to have the whole process running.
| Just in one location, though.
|
| https://skydiamond.com/our-process
| murphyslab wrote:
| > Each carat of mined diamond has a footprint of over 100kg
| of carbon dioxide and over 500kg of greenhouse gases in
| total.
|
| The report by Imperial College London Consultants, cited by
| Sky Diamond, highlights the environmental and climate costs
| of mining so-called precious stones:
|
| http://www.imperial-consultants.co.uk/wp-
| content/uploads/202...
|
| One more reason to ensure that synthetic diamonds cannot be
| identified or differentiated as such, given the high
| environmental impact of extracting that carbon allotrope
| from the ground.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _This seems like such an obvious thing to do for various
| reasons. It allows the (increasingly irrelevant) natural
| diamond industry to easily distinguish between their product
| and synthetic products._
|
| Surely we would want the opposite? I..e for someone to unload a
| ton of lab-grown diamonds indistinguishable from "natural"
| ones, to once and for all kill the racket run by De Beers and
| friend.
| Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote:
| They'd have to drive the cost down to barely above minimally
| viable real costs and scale larger than debeers to
| accommodate the induced demand of dirt cheap diamonds
| proliferating through the market. Swarovski/cz/generic
| translucent stone market's would also be crushed by this.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >This seems like such an obvious thing to do for various
| reasons
|
| Do this enough as a carbon sequestration method, and save the
| environment!
| thfuran wrote:
| Yeah, you just need a lot of renewable energy and somewhere
| to put a new, extra posh mountain range.
| jon_richards wrote:
| And then we can finally finish the first second of
| eternity. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~spok/grimmtmp/117.txt
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-27 23:02 UTC)