So, this is for a game I'm doing, but I need someone who knows from materials science to help a girl out.
1 cubic yard of ash should weigh around a thousand pounds, according to this thing I got off the internet. Assuming the ash was nearly pure carbon, and something magically smashed it together into diamond, about how big would the blob of crappy diamond be?
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on September 25, 2015, 09:12:49 PM
So, this is for a game I'm doing, but I need someone who knows from materials science to help a girl out.
1 cubic yard of ash should weigh around a thousand pounds, according to this thing I got off the internet. Assuming the ash was nearly pure carbon, and something magically smashed it together into diamond, about how big would the blob of crappy diamond be?
I can tell you alumina to sapphire, but not diamond. :sad:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 09:14:26 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on September 25, 2015, 09:12:49 PM
So, this is for a game I'm doing, but I need someone who knows from materials science to help a girl out.
1 cubic yard of ash should weigh around a thousand pounds, according to this thing I got off the internet. Assuming the ash was nearly pure carbon, and something magically smashed it together into diamond, about how big would the blob of crappy diamond be?
I can tell you alumina to sapphire, but not diamond. :sad:
Any ideas on where I should look? It doesn't have to be 100% accurate, just close enough ballpark that the guy with the physics doctorate doesn't look at me like I'm an idiot.
From http://www.evrmemories.com/Ashes-into-Diamonds-Information-s/176.htm
QuoteTypically all of the cremated ashes from your loved one are used in the synthesizing process of creating your cremation diamond although only 500gr of cremains is needed to make one diamond.
QuoteThe sizes are
.25 Carat
.50 Carat
1.0 Carat
This might be helpful.
Well, I honestly don't know much about making diamonds, but it's just a difference in the arrangement of the carbon molecules, so 1 ton of pure carbon is 1 ton of pure carbon regardless of what it looks like.
diamond is 3.52 grams per cm3
so, a 1,000 lb diamond is 453,592 grams and 128,861 cm3 which is 0.16854 cubic yards
(if I am to believe what I found on the internet, but you get the idea)
Quote from: rong on September 25, 2015, 09:38:48 PM
diamond is 3.52 grams per cm3
so, a 1,000 lb diamond is 453,592 grams and 128,861 cm3 which is 0.16854 cubic yards
(if I am to believe what I found on the internet, but you get the idea)
About a tenth of the original size? Sounds reasonable.
Thanks!
Looks like rong already answered it, but this says one gram of carbon would make a five carat diamond.
The conversions are up to you.
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2003-06/1055373367.Es.r.html
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If we're talking about pure carbon being converted to a different crystal lattice of pure carbon, there needs to be an explanation for the lost mass. Carbon doesn't just go away.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
diamonds don't explode when you crush them
I fail to understand why they are so popular, then.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Although even given that my education is pretty limited, I'm still going to say nope. That just isn't how mass or energy works. Lavoisier's experiments wouldn't have worked at all if they did.
i'm no materials scientist or what have you, but i believe heat is a by product of crushing - could some of the carbon "burned off" or something similar and left the scene as CO2 in the process?
Quote from: rong on September 26, 2015, 12:07:39 AM
i'm no materials scientist or what have you, but i believe heat is a by product of crushing - could some of the carbon "burned off" or something similar and left the scene as CO2 in the process?
Sure, of course it could. But if that's the case it needs to be properly accounted for in the explanation of the process.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Completely unfounded guess: even at its purest, there's no such thing as "100%" any material. So in the process, the non-carbon parts that add to mass get burned off/disposed.
Again, just a guess.
Quote from: LMNO on September 26, 2015, 03:35:30 AM
Completely unfounded guess: even at its purest, there's no such thing as "100%" any material. So in the process, the non-carbon parts that add to mass get burned off/disposed.
Again, just a guess.
Problem: Our feedstock was 99.995% pure. This doesn't allow for that much missing mass. Of course, you're going to have LOI issues, but there's not that much water involved, either.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 04:01:02 AM
Quote from: LMNO on September 26, 2015, 03:35:30 AM
Completely unfounded guess: even at its purest, there's no such thing as "100%" any material. So in the process, the non-carbon parts that add to mass get burned off/disposed.
Again, just a guess.
Problem: Our feedstock was 99.995% pure. This doesn't allow for that much missing mass. Of course, you're going to have LOI issues, but there's not that much water involved, either.
That IS a thinker. I'm not sure I have an answer if there's not much dross and waste material that could carry the rest of the alumina. The extra mass HAS to be somewhere. Fuck if I know though.
Quote from: The Wizard Joseph on September 26, 2015, 05:22:05 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 04:01:02 AM
Quote from: LMNO on September 26, 2015, 03:35:30 AM
Completely unfounded guess: even at its purest, there's no such thing as "100%" any material. So in the process, the non-carbon parts that add to mass get burned off/disposed.
Again, just a guess.
Problem: Our feedstock was 99.995% pure. This doesn't allow for that much missing mass. Of course, you're going to have LOI issues, but there's not that much water involved, either.
That IS a thinker. I'm not sure I have an answer if there's not much dross and waste material that could carry the rest of the alumina. The extra mass HAS to be somewhere. Fuck if I know though.
God is cheating again.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 06:32:47 AM
Quote from: The Wizard Joseph on September 26, 2015, 05:22:05 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 04:01:02 AM
Quote from: LMNO on September 26, 2015, 03:35:30 AM
Completely unfounded guess: even at its purest, there's no such thing as "100%" any material. So in the process, the non-carbon parts that add to mass get burned off/disposed.
Again, just a guess.
Problem: Our feedstock was 99.995% pure. This doesn't allow for that much missing mass. Of course, you're going to have LOI issues, but there's not that much water involved, either.
That IS a thinker. I'm not sure I have an answer if there's not much dross and waste material that could carry the rest of the alumina. The extra mass HAS to be somewhere. Fuck if I know though.
God is cheating again.
"God does not play dice" they say...
Oh really, so what's with the suspicious dice rolling noises and snickering coming from behind all that Shekhinah Glory? Just a big, ineffable 'effing ST screen so we can't be sure if he's "going fiat" or winging it. He knows how to run a "free will" universe, hedge your bets.
The raw diamond created would be the same mass as the carbon, but you have to grind off some to get it "diamond shaped" and polished.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on September 26, 2015, 02:24:21 PM
The raw diamond created would be the same mass as the carbon, but you have to grind off some to get it "diamond shaped" and polished.
That is also fair, but is also information that cannot be assumed.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Perhaps that is the amount of usable sapphire product after processing.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 06:39:33 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Perhaps that is the amount of usable sapphire product after processing.
Naw, sapphire manufacturers are like proper Scotsmen. "NOTHING GETS WASTED 'ROUND HERE." The RF pots they use to attain 3500C are like never-ending stew pots, but they are measured between each batch, so the amount actually used is known. Also, I asked a friend of mine over there what the LOI mass loss was, and he said it was about 3-5%.
I have also been digging on the DeBeers thing. Nobody knows how much - if any - wastage happens during the natural formation of diamonds, but apparently the numbers they gave for synthetic diamonds are net numbers.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 10:24:32 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 06:39:33 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Perhaps that is the amount of usable sapphire product after processing.
Naw, sapphire manufacturers are like proper Scotsmen. "NOTHING GETS WASTED 'ROUND HERE." The RF pots they use to attain 3500C are like never-ending stew pots, but they are measured between each batch, so the amount actually used is known. Also, I asked a friend of mine over there what the LOI mass loss was, and he said it was about 3-5%.
I have also been digging on the DeBeers thing. Nobody knows how much - if any - wastage happens during the natural formation of diamonds, but apparently the numbers they gave for synthetic diamonds are net numbers.
Well, here is the thing. When atomic mass is converted to energy, that's fission. If you don't have any actual atomic decay, a mole is a mole is a mole.
Perhaps in your process you lose some mass in a gaseous state. Who knows? Not me.
The loss in mass is attributed to evil thieving magpies.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 10:52:57 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 10:24:32 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 06:39:33 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Perhaps that is the amount of usable sapphire product after processing.
Naw, sapphire manufacturers are like proper Scotsmen. "NOTHING GETS WASTED 'ROUND HERE." The RF pots they use to attain 3500C are like never-ending stew pots, but they are measured between each batch, so the amount actually used is known. Also, I asked a friend of mine over there what the LOI mass loss was, and he said it was about 3-5%.
I have also been digging on the DeBeers thing. Nobody knows how much - if any - wastage happens during the natural formation of diamonds, but apparently the numbers they gave for synthetic diamonds are net numbers.
Well, here is the thing. When atomic mass is converted to energy, that's fission. If you don't have any actual atomic decay, a mole is a mole is a mole.
Perhaps in your process you lose some mass in a gaseous state. Who knows? Not me.
Well, mass doesn't disappear. So there's obviously something we don't know.
This is gonna bug the shit out of me until I figure it out.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 27, 2015, 07:23:00 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 10:52:57 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 10:24:32 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 06:39:33 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 01:58:42 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 26, 2015, 01:24:52 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
If it's anything like sapphire, it doesn't go anywhere. The atoms all line up in perfectly straight lines, and the mass is in fact stored as energy bonding the atoms so rigidly.
I am unsure of the physics involved here, because diamonds don't explode when you crush them. Of course, what you're really doing is just making smaller diamonds, so I guess they wouldn't.
That makes no sense at all to me, but I haven't taken physics and I only have four terms of chemistry.
Thing is, I'm not an actual material science geek. I'm a technician. I don't understand it, either.
Changing the chemical bonds won't change the mass. That's one thing I know for sure. Making and breaking bonds never changes the mass of an element. The mass of a quantity of pure carbon is determined solely by how many carbon atoms are present.
See, I don't know. I DO know, though, that to make 4 cubic cm of sapphire, weighing .3 kg, you need 1 kg of high purity alumina. I was led to believe that the high temperatures involved caused the mass to be used up making bonds, and I was obviously misled. Where does it actually go? NO IDEA.
Perhaps that is the amount of usable sapphire product after processing.
Naw, sapphire manufacturers are like proper Scotsmen. "NOTHING GETS WASTED 'ROUND HERE." The RF pots they use to attain 3500C are like never-ending stew pots, but they are measured between each batch, so the amount actually used is known. Also, I asked a friend of mine over there what the LOI mass loss was, and he said it was about 3-5%.
I have also been digging on the DeBeers thing. Nobody knows how much - if any - wastage happens during the natural formation of diamonds, but apparently the numbers they gave for synthetic diamonds are net numbers.
Well, here is the thing. When atomic mass is converted to energy, that's fission. If you don't have any actual atomic decay, a mole is a mole is a mole.
Perhaps in your process you lose some mass in a gaseous state. Who knows? Not me.
Well, mass doesn't disappear. So there's obviously something we don't know.
This is gonna bug the shit out of me until I figure it out.
Though it remains controversial and unclear, I'd guess it may have something to do with the energy involved for the reaction making the carbon react with oxygen. That then begs the question if oxygen is nescesary for the production of energy. Maybe it's convenient to use combustion because it can also increase pressure, however I'd bet we also have the technology to create those conditions in a vacuum.
[edit: seems like current transmutation techniques involve using an oxygenated environment, in alternation with non-oxygenated. Maybe going from hexagonal to cubic arrangement also requires electron scavenging, donated by the oxygen, though I'm really not sure about this last point]
Okay, you fuckers got me. I've been hoarding the extra mass. It started small, scraping a little ash here and there and squirreling it away in my pockets, hoping that nobody would notice. Signora, you must understand, nailed to the floor the worm who brings me my cocaine and I needed a little something to TIDE ME OVER, OKAY?
This is how it started, but soon enough it ESCALATED. Pretty soon I'm ferrying out handfuls of ash to the car and stuffing the glovebox full. Transporting it home and shoveling it into ash piles behind the garden shed (and then filling the garden shed). I'm hopped up on ash all day at this stage. It suggests to me that I do terrible things. It helps me dream up methods of better harvesting and secreting it. It helps me scheme more and more brilliant uses of this under-appreciated material.
At first these were purely entrepreneurial ventures. Many foods, you see, contain "ash" as ingredient. So I figure, if ash is one ingredient, why can it not be all ingredients? And I sell 100% ash burgers and ash soda from my food truck. I serve ash cones to delight and amaze children. As my appreciation for ash increased, I began to treat it less as a business and more as a religious pursuit. I began to get carried away.
It is good that I live in this little country on the bottom of the planet. It becomes easy to tell the fourteen-odd others "why, yes? There always has been a second island, friend. We do not live there simply because it is too dusty" and they agree and struggle to pull their feet free from the floor.
It has been long since I visited the North Island, but they remember me still. They think of me when a southerly snatches powder from the surface of my ashen desert, obscuring their green fields and polluting their clear waters and carrying my hysterical shrieks into their homes. And they look at one another knowingly, say nothing, and try not to think too hard whenever they notice a little mass missing here and there.
I love you people.
Quote from: Pæs on September 28, 2015, 03:26:17 AM
Okay, you fuckers got me. I've been hoarding the extra mass. It started small, scraping a little ash here and there and squirreling it away in my pockets, hoping that nobody would notice. Signora, you must understand, nailed to the floor the worm who brings me my cocaine and I needed a little something to TIDE ME OVER, OKAY?
This is how it started, but soon enough it ESCALATED. Pretty soon I'm ferrying out handfuls of ash to the car and stuffing the glovebox full. Transporting it home and shoveling it into ash piles behind the garden shed (and then filling the garden shed). I'm hopped up on ash all day at this stage. It suggests to me that I do terrible things. It helps me dream up methods of better harvesting and secreting it. It helps me scheme more and more brilliant uses of this under-appreciated material.
At first these were purely entrepreneurial ventures. Many foods, you see, contain "ash" as ingredient. So I figure, if ash is one ingredient, why can it not be all ingredients? And I sell 100% ash burgers and ash soda from my food truck. I serve ash cones to delight and amaze children. As my appreciation for ash increased, I began to treat it less as a business and more as a religious pursuit. I began to get carried away.
It is good that I live in this little country on the bottom of the planet. It becomes easy to tell the fourteen-odd others "why, yes? There always has been a second island, friend. We do not live there simply because it is too dusty" and they agree and struggle to pull their feet free from the floor.
It has been long since I visited the North Island, but they remember me still. They think of me when a southerly snatches powder from the surface of my ashen desert, obscuring their green fields and polluting their clear waters and carrying my hysterical shrieks into their homes. And they look at one another knowingly, say nothing, and try not to think too hard whenever they notice a little mass missing here and there.
:lulz:
Paes, you glorious bastard. :lulz:
My understanding of the process of making synthetic diamonds is that it is accomplished by taking a miniscule diamond seed crystal and putting it in a vacuum chamber. That chamber is then filled with vaporized carbon, which sticks atom by atom to the diamond surface to make it bigger. I would assume that a certain amount of the carbon sticks to the walls of the chamber.
QG keeps asking things about rocks and stuff. Gets me all weird around the collar.
1lb = .453 kg
1000 lb = 2207.50552 kg
2207.50552 kg = 2207505.52 g
density of diamond = 3.5 g/ml
2207505.52 g / 3.5g/ml = 630715.863 ml
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
presumably lost as assorted waste products
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on October 12, 2015, 05:40:11 PM
QG keeps asking things about rocks and stuff. Gets me all weird around the collar.
A girl can't plot smashing a planet-wide blanket of ash into shiny rocks to make into weapons anymore?
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 12, 2015, 11:11:56 PM
1lb = .453 kg
1000 lb = 2207.50552 kg
Shouldn't that be 1000 lb = 453 kg?
Quote from: Xaz on October 13, 2015, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 12, 2015, 11:11:56 PM
1lb = .453 kg
1000 lb = 2207.50552 kg
Shouldn't that be 1000 lb = 453 kg?
Yes it should. In retrospect I don't know where the extra division step I did came from.
EDIT:
OK
435kg = 435000 g
diamond density = 3.5g/cc
435000g / 3.5g/cc = 124285.714 cc
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 12, 2015, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
presumably lost as assorted waste products
Have you considered reading the rest of the thread before shitting a SGitR answer out of your idiotic face?
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 14, 2015, 03:35:18 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 12, 2015, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
presumably lost as assorted waste products
Have you considered reading the rest of the thread before shitting a SGitR answer out of your idiotic face?
What is SGitR? I was totally on board with the rest of that.
Quote from: The Wizard Joseph on October 24, 2015, 04:56:09 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 14, 2015, 03:35:18 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 12, 2015, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2015, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 25, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
According to DeBeers, a .2 gram diamond was formed from 2.8 grams of pure carbon.
So, 1/14th.
Where does the rest of the carbon go?
presumably lost as assorted waste products
Have you considered reading the rest of the thread before shitting a SGitR answer out of your idiotic face?
What is SGitR? I was totally on board with the rest of that.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=32044.0
How is that different from anyone else here?
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 25, 2015, 06:12:51 AM
How is that different from anyone else here?
Well, I am a complete dumbass, and was wrong about the wastage in sapphire production, despite being peripherally involved in the industry. This does not make me want to scream at people. It just means I was wrong.
How about you?
(http://cdn.meme.am/instances/60046009.jpg)