Re: Carnegie Institution new approach to making diamonds

From: Havirrion (havirrion_at_NOblueDAMNyonderSPAM.co.uk)
Date: 06/08/04 

Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 03:09:07 GMT

aSkeptic wrote:

> Havirrion <havirrion@NOblueDAMNyonderSPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cmOwc.1954$P22.19924079@news-text.cableinet.net>...
>
>>aSkeptic wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I know that this has been posted to sci.materials before, but this
>>>sure is interesting!
>>>
>>>http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/newsroom/pr.cfm?ni=51
>>>
>>>The researchers took CVD grown diamond, subjected it to 70kBar and
>>>2000C for a few minutes, and out comes a flawless gem quality stone.
>>>
>>>Carnegies's process sounds a little like the sintered diamond approach
>>>described in this document http://www.htracyhall.org/pdf/megadiam.pdf
>>>
>>>The authors of the pdf believe that diamond at 60kBar and 2000C assume
>>>some plasticity.
>>>
>>>These two processes remind me of glacial ice forming from compacting
>>>snow. In the CVD case, are the tiny voids between crystals geting
>>>mashed out? How does this result in perfect cleavage? Sintered diamond
>>>doesn't have perfect cleavage to be sure, but I wonder if a sintering
>>>process applied with 300kBar and 4000C could make gem crystals..
>>
>>
>>Hmmm, something seems very wrong here. 50% harder than natural
>>diamond!(and that they say is a mimimum.)
>
>
> I cant wait to see the carbon 13 version. Seriously, how can they
> claim a 50% improvement in hardness when it's basically the same
> molecule that natural diamond is. Or is it?

They are big on hype, but not on detail. It looks like bull***, and
until they demonstate otherwise it will remain so.

Quantcast