Nuke us some damned diamonds!

[Bean_Counter]

*Originally posted by tomas *
**The Russians have succeeded in producing diamonds for sale as jewelry, not just industrial grade. They are being sold in the states now at reduced prices. De Beers is frantic from what I have seen in a documentary on the same and are calling for some type of marking. Apparently, the synthetic diamonds are indistinguishable from “naturally formed” and can only be spotted under controlled lighting conditions. If these that I have personally seen are the real Russian synthetics(I did not examine these with a loop)than I can understand De Beers’ concern. They were quite impressive, and alot cheaper. **

Aren’t the synthetic diamonds perfect, though? Perfectly aligned crystal configuration without any inclusions?

I can foresee the marketing campaign already:
“It’s the imperfections that make them perfect!”

Future wife-to-be to future husband-to-be, “This diamond is perfect, you cheap bastard!”

Regards.

[Bean_Counter]

*Originally posted by Stupendous man *

---

Right now, there is no plan of action if an asteroid were discovered heading for us. **
[/QUOTE]

Bending over and kissing your ass good-bye springs to mind.

[friedo]

*Originally posted by RickJay *

friedo:

You just contradicted yourself (or your economics prof) twice, dude.

Diamonds are expensive because there is a lot of demand for them (Shiny Factor) and the supply is limited (by the DeBeers monopoly.) Their price, given demand and the current supply situation, is exactly what would be predicted by the laws of supply and demand.

I was saying that the price is high because the demand is high (shiny), not because the supply is low (in nature). But the supply is forced down because of De Beers.

[Dijon_Warlock]

There was a Frontline documentary on the deBeers cartel a few years ago. IIRC, a scientist at some big corporation (for some reason I’m thinking GE or Westinghouse, but don’t know if they are right) perfected a process for producting gem quality artificial diamonds in the color of you choice (pretty much killing deBeers’ stranglehold on the world market). Word got out, deBeers paid a visit to the heads of power at the company, and the scientist was dismissed. No gemstones for us. It’s possible to turn them out, but the company with the technology has refused to do so. DeBeers are never getting business from me. Da Beers, on the other hand, get a consistent portion of every paycheck.

[Ankh_Too]

*Originally posted by tomas *
**The Russians have succeeded in producing diamonds for sale as jewelry, not just industrial grade. They are being sold in the states now at reduced prices. De Beers is frantic from what I have seen in a documentary on the same and are calling for some type of marking. Apparently, the synthetic diamonds are indistinguishable from “naturally formed” and can only be spotted under controlled lighting conditions. If these that I have personally seen are the real Russian synthetics(I did not examine these with a loop)than I can understand De Beers’ concern. They were quite impressive, and alot cheaper. **

Nova ran a program about the deelopment of gem quality synthetic diamonds in Feb, 2000. They talked to both the various developers and people from DeBeers who were wroking out ways of detecting the new diamonds.

Taken from the transcript
**PAUL SPEAR: This is a very intense short-wave ultraviolet lamp, and what we see here on the left are four synthetic diamonds and on the right four natural diamonds, and we’re looking at the luminescence which is given off by the diamond. And you can see that on the left the four synthetic diamonds are glowing very brightly under the action of this very hard ultraviolet light, but as the four natural diamonds are almost inert under the action of this ultraviolet light. And of course from synthetic diamonds you see phosphorescence when the lamp is turned off - the diamonds glow in the dark.

NARRATOR: This work has traced the cause of phosphorescence in manufactured diamonds to the way they grow. Natural diamonds have an octahedral structure. But synthetics, because they grow in an artificial environment, also form cube shaped sectors. It is this mix of cube and octahedral growth that causes man-made diamonds to absorb ultraviolet light differently.

PAUL SPEAR: If we look at the image here you can see here where the seed crystal was positioned for the synthetic diamond to grow from, and here are the octahedral growth sectors which are fluorescing. If you rotate the diamond round, you see these octahedral growths sectors have grown larger, and at the same time that initial small cubic sector has grown much larger as well, so this very simple growth sector structure is indicative of a near colorless synthetic diamond.**

Paul Spears is listed as a “research scientist” working at DeBeers Gem Defense Laboratory outside London.

At the time of Broadcast, the Russian gems still had a problem with too much nitrogen bonding in the lattice structure of teh synthetic diamond which gives it a yellowish or brown color. A group from Utah has developed a way to add aluminum to draw out the nitrogen and leave a colorless diamond.

[anya_marie]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ankh_Too *
**

*Originally posted by tomas *
**The Russians have succeeded in producing diamonds for sale as jewelry, not just industrial grade. They are being sold in the states now at reduced prices. De Beers is frantic from what I have seen in a documentary on the same and are calling for some type of marking. **

from the nova transcript**PAUL SPEAR: This is a very intense short-wave ultraviolet lamp, and what we see here on the left are four synthetic diamonds and on the right four natural diamonds, and we’re looking at the luminescence which is given off by the diamond. And you can see that on the left the four synthetic diamonds are glowing very brightly under the action of this very hard ultraviolet light, but as the four natural diamonds are almost inert under the action of this ultraviolet light. And of course from synthetic diamonds you see phosphorescence when the lamp is turned off - the diamonds glow in the dark. **

**

PAUL SPEAR: If you rotate the diamond round, you see these octahedral growths sectors have grown larger, and at the same time that initial small cubic sector has grown much larger as well, so this very simple growth sector structure is indicative of a near colorless synthetic diamond.**

At Broadcast, the Russian gems still had a problem with too much nitrogen bonding in the lattice structure, which gives it a yellowish or brown color. A group from Utah has developed a way to add aluminum to draw out the nitrogen and leave a colorless diamond. **

i wonder if they can manufacture any other gemstones yet. i think it would be interesting to see what they could make .purple sapphires, emeralds, amethysts, and blue diamonds that do not cost you your next three souls. FWIW i find the deBeers comercials incredibly retarded and irritating.

how bright is the phosphorescence and will the amount of it change as diamonds are maed in different colours.
i did not know that and i hope i can catch that episode of nova on tv. is it true that diamonds can be found in Arkansas?

could/would that explain why cubic zirconia is so white? i cannot help but enjoy the way the deBeers people aree panicking, tee hee.

[LouisB]

Diamonds are found in Arkansas.

Synthetic rubies and saphires are produced commercialy.

[Max_the_Immortal]

The DeBeers monopoly is the ONLY reason that diamonds are expensive. If it were motivated, DeBeers could flood the diamond market to the point that they would be worth little more than glass. The problem is that there exists only one diamond mine not owned by DeBeers in the entire world (and the owners of that mine cut a deal with DeBeers to not screw up the maket price of diamonds). Yes diamonds are useful, but that has little to do with their price being so high (softwood products are very useful too, but they have a low cost due to a large supply).

<irrelevant> If we want to use nukes in a creative way, we should use them to generate a bunch of heat on Mars to try to start a terraforming effort. </irrelevant>

[Barbarian]

*Originally posted by Stupendous man *
**
Right now, there is no plan of action if an asteroid were discovered heading for us. **

hell, there’s not even a plan to see if any asteroids are heading towards us (and I don’t consider what’s currently being done a “plan”. It’s more like driving down the highway with the windshield painted black and relying on the reflection from the cars beside you to tell you if anything’s in the way.)

But if you want an example of ORION in action, go read Footfall by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Baby elephants invade the planet, so Bellingham, WA goes up in smoke under the hail of a hundred nukes to blast every space shuttle into orbit…

[handy]

To know if the Russian diamonds were real, couldn’t they just DNA test them?

[RickJay]

*Originally posted by Stupendous man *
**
>You first, Tumor-Boy.

Ha HA! Mere radiation has no effect on… Stupendous Man! **

But of course. How dense of me to miss the obvious classical reference in your name.

[RickJay]

*Originally posted by Stupendous man *
**

I don’t think that this is correct. If we noticed that an asteroid was on a collision course with Earth with lots and lots of time to spare, it wouldn’t take that much of a push to change its orbit enough for it to miss the Earth. A nuke could provide this little push, or a hundred nukes, or a thousand nukes. **
[/QUOTE]

While it is true that that many hundreds of nukes would possibly move an asteroid out of our way, the problem is that if I recall correctly, there aren’t enough nukes around to do the job currently, and even fewer methods of delivering those to a point far away from earth in space that the asteroid would be deflected in time. The closer it gets, the more energy you require to push it away. Eventually, all of the nuculear bombs capable of being produced on earth wouldn’t do the trick.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure what size of asteroid we’re talking about here, but your garden-variety asteroid would be pretty much pulverized into gravel by a small fraction of the nuclear weapons available. Leaving aside the “size of Texas” movie asteroids, most potential dinosaur-killers are what, a mile across? Maybe two?

A large nuclear weapon will make an enormous hole. I haven’t done the math but I have a lot of difficulty believing that a two-mile asteroid would survive an encounter with a barrage of 20-megaton fusion bombs.

[Stupendous_man]

**

I’m not sure what size of asteroid we’re talking about here, but your garden-variety asteroid would be pretty much pulverized into gravel by a small fraction of the nuclear weapons available. Leaving aside the “size of Texas” movie asteroids, most potential dinosaur-killers are what, a mile across? Maybe two?
**

It’s true… It might be possible to blast a small-medium sized asteroid into many, many smaller pieces, but this isn’t much better. Collectively, the pieces would still enter the atmosphere, and release their kinetic energy into that. This would certainly create an enourmous increase in temperature in the atmosphere, and drasticly affect our weather and climate. Is it better to have the pieces spread out over a larger area, or to not? One almost has to wonder if it would be better just to let the earth itself take of impact, rather than lets thousands of little meteors ruin the atmosphere… Oh well… That’s not likely ever to happen. The largest asteroids in our solar system are already under scrutiny, and thanks to the literally thousands of amateur astronomers out there, we would see a large new asteroid long before it arrived here.

[Omniscient]

rubs eyes

rereads handy’s question

Nah, couldn’t be…

[casdave]

Omniscient

You haven’t read too much of “The Silmarillion” or “Lord of the rings” then ?

Personally I find a cup of freshly squeezed diamond juce very refreshing.