Fake diamond = better than real diamond?


This is a quote from an ex-Brigadier General who has crafted a way to create fake diamonds - that are equal to or greater than real diamonds.

It doesn’t stop there. These diamonds above are ‘almost flawless’ - but the method used to create them leaves ever-so-slight traces of metal compounds used in solvents.

These diamonds below are ‘absolutely perfect’ - how can you tell them apart from a ‘real’ diamond? Because it has no flaws. This process has an added bonus. It can be used to create diamonds in any shape - for oh - lets say, a wafer to be used in a computer chip.

So whats your opinion? Are these diamonds just as ‘real’ as ‘real diamonds’? Would you bite your ass if your wife, girlfriend, or mom didnt take the two carat ‘fake’ over the ‘real’? I forgot to mention that fake diamonds cost 5 dollars - and that 4 million dollar pink diamond Kobe Bryant just bought for his wife? Its worth 45 bucks. These can be made in any color. =)

Diamonds themselves are only as important as they are because of one of the most successful marketing campaigns of all time: one that managed to convince people that everyone MUST give diamonds for any sort of wedding/courting scenario. Essentially, a monopolist (DeBeers) realized that it had an essentially bullshit luxury product: one which had very little real value other than its scarcity. And they succeeded. The diamond market is one big pathetic joke.

Linares’ stones are superior to “real” diamonds in every way relevant to the consumer market, but the problem is that half the point of diamonds is simply to show off how much money you can blow on your sweetie on something she can keep forever.

Well let me ask you this:

If your wife (assuming your a man and married) fakes an organism and you can’t tell is there any difference? Does it matter? To quote the great Marvin Gaye, “Aint Nothing Like The Real Thing.”

I’m being fatuous, but on a serious note I think when it comes to computer parts and industrial tools the origin or price of a diamond is irrelevant. But, when it’s a wedding ring the old fashioned way seems more sincere. The financial sacrifice, the huge leap of faith a spouse makes to demonstrate their love and devotion with a diamond is a powerful gesture and from what I hear is very sexy to boot.

That said Apos is totally correct from a rational perspective. And many diamonds are enabling dictators to enslave their populations in Africa. I guess it all depends on your particular sensibilities.

I have always said, “Why buy a woman a diamond that will last forever. She sure as hell wont.”

But hey, for 5 bucks a carat even I will splurge =)

And it’s worse than that. I remember seeing a 60 Minutes piece on DeBeers. Apparently, even real diamonds aren’t scarce anymore; they discovered a huge number of them, and they’re sitting in storage. The prices are artificially propped up by the diamond cartel.

I’ve been reading this stuff myself- interesting ideas for processors.

But as far as actual diamonds go, as mentioned, the scarcity- and thus market value- has been artifically controlled. DeBeers is sitting on literally warehouses full of diamonds, but they dole them out skillfully and carefully to control the market price.

And make no mistake- DeBeers is THE diamond marketplace. They hold the total monopoly, and any other suppliers (supposedly a few Russian and French sources) are literally a drop in the bucket. DeBeers will probably buy them out too.

Put it this way- what do you think prices would be if you could ONLY buy computers and software direct from Microsoft? That there were NO competitors, no Apple, no Linux, no third-party programmers. You bought MS or nothing.

That’s what DeBeers has- if you have a diamond, in anything other than an industrial use (like a diamond-tipped ceramic saw or a diamond knife hone) then that diamond came from DeBeers.

They have carefully cultivated the idea of diamonds as tokens of affection for a century- and look at cainxinth’s reply: It worked!

Basically it’s a matter of cash- the lady feels you’re more sincere when you spring for a $5,000 rock than a $250 cubic zirconia.

If the artificials are marketed at near the cost of real, the lady won’t care- you still spent $4,200 on her.

And considering how many women flaunt huge cubic zirconia, I have little doubt they’ll step right up for the chance to show off a 5-carat real diamond, even though it’s artifical.

If the General is smart, he could even start offering custom made diamonds- you want blue-green? It’s yours. The lady likes red? Here’s a three-carat rose`. That takes the supposed “stigma” away from it being an artificial- sure, it’s a man-made diamond, but the lady can say, he had it made for ME!

Plus, as noted in the Wired article, you can be assured they’re not “conflict diamonds”- and with more and more women joining up with the bunny-huggers and other activist lifestyles, that- properly marketed- can have a powerful draw.

These new manufactured diamonds are just as real as those dug out of the ground.

The old process of producing artificial diamonds left them with enough empurities to be detectable by a spectrograph.

But this new process makes diamonds that are literally indistinguishable from perfect dug-out-of-the-ground diamonds. In fact, they are SO pure, that thay can be distinguished from imperfect diamonds by that very perfection.

However, The very best dug-out-of-the ground diamonds will probably give false positives on the artificial diamond test. And isn’t THAT gonna chap deBeer’s ass.

Anyway. I think you shouldn’t be using the word ‘fake’ here. This ain’t cubic zirconia we are talking about here. These are real diamonds, they just aren’t natural. diamonds. In much the same way that cultured pearls aren’t strictly natural pearls, but aren’t considered to be ‘fake’ either. (in fact, cultured pearls are generally thought to be superior).

For the purpose of my topic, these are fake.

Its just a contextual distinguisher. or something like that 0.o


You are right though, whats the term when something is realer than real? Maybe its a new Q for Cecil.

It’s still incorrect to refer to them as “fake” because that would imply that they are not actually diamonds. The correct terms are “natural” vs. “artificial.” They are both real diamonds. If I made NaCl from a lump of sodium (Na) metal and a gas of chlorine (Cl2) gas, you wouldn’t call that “fake salt,” would you?

Anyway I have no trouble with the notion that natural crystals with imperfections are more valuable than artificla ones. If they are distinguishable by any means, and if demand and/or supply are different (which they obviously are), then of course the value will be different.



The only difference seems to be how recently the diamond generation took place. Other than that, coal goes through the exact same chemical reaction to turn into a diamond. I don’t see a differentiator at all.

Here’s the patent: System and method for producing synthetic diamond

Don’t think either one will be worth much pretty soon, ‘counterfeit’ synthetic diamonds will probably destroy the diamond cartel and people will move to some other rare jewel to spend their money on.

By the way, I think it’s worth being skeptical about the claims of artificial diamond-makers. And if the Russians really did have a cost-effective way of creating diamonds, why didn’t they flood the market with them? They certainly need the money.

At least an artifical diamond won’t have any blood on it.


Huh? Skeptical? About what?

If you read the entire article, the Russians didnt have the resources capable of finding the precise enviroment necessary to make this cost effective- so they sold a prospectively shady machine to a man who bought it on a gamble for 57 grand.

Why havent they ‘flooded the market’ ? Again, you must not have read the article - they are still perfecting the method. You should read the patent also.

To add - I find Wired magazine to be a very credible source. I dont think anyone has material to prove otherwise.

I’d choose a fake diamond over a real one if it was larger and just as pretty.

It all comes down to your emotional ties to money – and your own self-worth. If you feel you are classy WITHOUT the diamonds, then you are. If you feel you need to have an expensive rock on your hand ‘proving’ someone else loves you, then there’s a serious problem.

Many people crave things that are outside their realm of living. That’s why the nation is so far in debt (personal debt) – people living above their means.

If the same-looking stone can cost $5, versus $2000 – I’ll take the $5 ANYTIME. And invest the extra $1995 into discounted real estate notes that will bring a ROI of a lot more than a silly ole diamond can.

Ok, so where’s that URL?

If you can’t tell the difference between a cultured stone and a natural stone, what difference does it make?

“Take the cash and let the credit go”
—Omar Kyham

They’re still real diamonds. And I like how he calls them cultured.

DeBeers is going to be knocked upside the head. There’s nothing like being knocked off your throne.

Good for him – taking a chance like that. It took a lot of courage.

feistyALgal I havent seen a website for the diamond companies but if you read the Wired article (my first paragraph is a link) you can get the skinny =)