h a l f b a k e r yOh yeah? Well, eureka too.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Ocean Floor Diamonds
Lower a hydraulic intensifier full of carbon to the floor of the Mariana Trench | |
It takes about 5-7.1 GPa of pressure to make diamonds. The
pressure in the Mariana Trench is about 110 MPa. Proposed is
a hydraulic intensifier where an outer ram exposed to
seawater actuates an inner ram exposed to a chamber full of
carbon. (The device would also have an electrical heating
element
to increase the temperature to the requisite 1200-
1500 C.) With an area ratio of roughly 50:1, lowering this
device to the floor of the Mariana Trench could produce
pressures sufficient to make diamonds.
Liquid diamond
http://news.discove...jupiter-uranus.html
[ytk, Apr 04 2012]
Carbon phase diagram
http://www.mathewpe...n_phase_diagram.jpg
[ldischler, Apr 05 2012]
[link]
|
| |
For discussion. What is the energy cost of lowering and retrieving this ram 11km relative to the cost of generating the same pressure in the lab? |
|
| |
Yeah, I'm with [MechE]. Your using the Marian
Trench to provide 110Mpa of pressure, yet that kind
of pressure is attainable fairly easily on land. |
|
| |
//that kind of pressure is attainable fairly easily on land.// |
|
| |
A similar scheme utilising high-pressure salesmen? |
|
| |
It might impress a fiancee if you told her you made
her a diamond that way. If her name is Mary-Ana
you could romantically tell her it came from 'her
trench'. |
|
| |
Maybe you can also use the Kola Super Deep Bore
Hole this way. |
|
| |
This would be possible deep in the gas-giant planets, where you would have the pressure and temperature with no equipment needed. You could even have oceans of liquid diamond. |
|
| |
Liquid diamond is a contradiction in terms. Diamond is a specific form of solid carbon. |
|
| |
Ah, but you could have fluidised carbon, that is a body of very small diamonds, agitated by vibration or fluid current. |
|
| |
The surprising thing about liquid diamond is that it's even denser than solid diamond. |
|
| |
That's not surprising to anybody who's ever had a
diamond milkshake. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off
to polish my monocle. |
|
| |
If gaseous iron can exist (and it does) then I don't see why
liquid diamond is such a stretch. State of
matter is overrated. |
|
| |
Ah but now we're talking states of matter not states of allotropes of matter. |
|
| |
The liquid diamond you mention is actually liquid carbon. It doesn't retain the very specific crystal structure that defines it as diamond. |
|
| |
Normally, when heated enough to liquify, diamond
changes into graphite. But apparently scientists
have managed to prevent this transformation and
produce liquid diamond, which is distinct from liquid
carbon in that it reverts to a diamond state as it
solidifies (link). |
|
| |
That article is a little misleading. Yes, at sufficiently large pressures, diamond can be melted and then frozen back to diamond, and clearly the way in which it does so is interesting. But I would still be reluctant to use the term 'liquid diamond', which is not really more meaningful than 'liquid ice'. |
|
| |
Seconding [Spider], if they melted graphite, then
raised the temperature and pressure, then
lowered the pressure, it would still produce
diamond. |
|
| |
Likewise, if they melted diamond, then changed
the conditions the right way, they
would get graphite. |
|
| |
Iron is still iron, no matter if it's plasma, gas,
liquid or solid. Carbon is not diamond unless it's a
particular crystalline form. |
|
| |
//Could someone make snowflake structures from
gaseous iron// |
|
| |
Depends on what you mean by snowflake. If
you're simply talking about solid iron falling from
the sky as precipitation, then yes (it's unlikely
though, since you'd have to have exactly the right
conditions in an inert atmosphere). |
|
| |
If you mean something with the crystalline
structure of a snowflake, then no, since iron
doesn't crystallize the same way. |
|
| |
And I don't think anyone's arguing that carbon at
the right combination of temperature and
pressure will solidify into diamond, that's how
they're created in nature, after all. The concern is
that the calling the base material liquid diamond
is like referring to a bin full of legos as a model
space ship. Sure, you might be able to build the
ship
out of it, but you can also build a bunch of other
things as well, and there's nothing inherent in the
legos that defines one in preference to the other
(unless you've got the little space-ship window
piece, but there isn't anything like that in
diamond). |
|
| |
Iron on the other hand, is one of the legos itself
(it's an atom). Arrange it however you like, and
the it's still some combination of that same lego. |
|
| |
// Temperature treatment of metals is after all just
varying the crystalline structure. // |
|
| |
Thank you. That was my line of thinking, but expressed
more fully. |
|
| |
MechE seems caught up in semantics. But I suspect the "liquid diamond" phase is actually a metal or liquid metal phase. |
|
| |
I suspect that the 'liquid diamond' phrase was chosen for catchy copy, rather than scientific accuracy. |
|
| |
// Likewise, if they melted diamond, then changed the conditions the right way, they would get graphite.// |
|
| |
That does sound like a pricey way to make pencils, but each to their own. |
|
| |
Alterother, ldischler, you're free to argue that people are just arguing semantics - because they are. However, that's because semantics are important. |
|
| |
You're free to disagree - however, one of the consequences of that is that I (and possibly other people) will start describing items connected by duck tape as welded together, and/or saying that you glue things together for a living. |
|
| |
While there's no rule about it, Loris, it's usual to relax the technical word usage at the halfbakery, otherwise, every idea would degenerate into a discussion of terminology. |
|
| |
//otherwise, every idea would degenerate into a
discussion of terminology// That depends on what
you mean by "degenerate". |
|
| |
// describing items connected by duck tape as welded
together, and/or saying that you glue things together for a
living. // |
|
| |
Them's fightin' words. But you're right (about the
semantics,
not about the ducks and glue). |
|
| |
<grumble grumble mutter... 'glued together' my ass... the
nerve... mutter mutter grumble> |
|
| |
"Semantics (n. pl.) The branch of linguistics and logic
concerned with meaning." There's a nice oxymoron
in the phrase "just semantics." To use the phrase
you have to misunderstand the meaning of the word
semantics. Implying you're a person who considers
meaning unimportant. Implying you understood the
meaning of the word correctly after all. |
|
| |
....as Socrates reportedly said "so what do you mean by 'mean'?" Language is more or less circular. |
|
| |
I'm a lot more worried by the governor of Shiga prefecture in Japan who says she doesn't want the local reactor turned back on "It appears to me that they are compromising technological safety in a half-baked way," |
|
| |
It's time for HB to protect it's IP rights! Get onto Apple's lawyers and we can pool resources |
|
| |