still not as dark as my heart.
LPF Donation via Stripe | LPF Donation - Other Methods
Links below open in new window
ArcticMyst Security by Avery
New material absorbs 99.96% of light, Guinness World Record darkest substance.
- Thread starter AaronT
- Start date
still not as dark as my heart.
Radim
0
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,458
- Points
- 83
I believe it is just matter of time (might be long time anyway), also it is not completely safe material (although not considered to be toxic), therefore I'm not surprised they sell it only to research facilities and so. These nanotechnologic stuff might have still not observed effects on human health as these structures are not usually found in nature.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
- Points
- 0
Good point, It is a complete unknown how the human body could deal with such a substance, Best case scenario it will just expel it, Not so good scenario it becomes commutative because I don't think the body could break it down in any way ???
Radim
0
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,458
- Points
- 83
Thanks. Just consider when radium was discovered by Pierre and Marie Curie. It was used for various watches as glowing paint and it became big hit that time. The consequences came later. Although they might be considered quite safe to wear (under normal conditions) what I've read, definitely people making them were affected by lack of safety rules unknown that days.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Messages
- 17,437
- Points
- 113
I remember having a clock with radium lit hands and hours back in the early 1960s, or late 1950s. Can't remember how old the clock was at that time.
Radim
0
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,458
- Points
- 83
Could be even from beginning of 20th century. These were the times when they became available.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
- Points
- 0
If your concerned about radium when making watches, Don't worry as you can always have the women do it ! And if they complain radium is making them sick just hire some medical professionals to attribute it to other causes like syphilis or a notorious $exually transmitted infection they had back then !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Messages
- 17,437
- Points
- 113
I doubt seriously it was nearly that old. It was a windup alarm clock that sat on my night stand. It did glow in the dark, though.
Benm
0
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 7,896
- Points
- 113
That's actually quite an interesting matter.
It does absorb 99.96% of light, but that also means it reflects/scatters 0.04% of it.
I'm not sure this stuff even comes as fine particles, but if it did, it might make a laser beam more visible than totally clean air at certain concentrations.
The problem is that air scatters light making laser beams visible from the side, but it doesn't do that very well - surely the sky looks blue, but it takes several kilometers of air to achieve that scattering effect.
Laser beams are normally visible because of dust in the air, not the air itself. In something like a cleanroom laser beams are not that visible - up to the point where you could shine a couple of watts of 445 nm without people being aware of it as long as there is ambient lighting.
Dispersing some vantablack particles in the air in such an environment might just make the laser beam visible, or perhaps not... something interesting to test!
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
The wiki article says this material is just carbon nanotubes oriented vertically in a "forest" of sorts. Remove the orientation, and you remove the deep black. What you're describing is basically soot.
Carbon nanotubes are nontoxic as far as I know.
If your thermopile coating as it stands only absorbs 95% of light, simply add the other 5% as a calibration constant. Using some spooky space-age substance would be expensive and unnecessary. In this case, the substance is also somewhat fragile.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
- Points
- 0
Carbon nanotubes are nothing like "soot" the same way they are nothing like diamonds or graphite ! they are all just carbon atoms.....
Carbon nanotubes are possible the strongest substance man has ever created, The only thing that could be fragile about carbon nanotubes might be how they are attached to something.....
Last edited:
Not really --only if you don't comprehend what is known because you have never looked at what is known and indicated about carbon nanotubes.
"As of 2013, the United States National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health was not aware of any reports of adverse health effects in workers using or producing carbon nanotubes or carbon nanofibers. However a systematic review of 54 laboratory animal studies indicated that they could cause adverse pulmonary effects including inflammation, granulomas, and pulmonary fibrosis, which were of similar or greater potency when compared with other known fibrogenic materials such as silica, asbestos, and ultrafine carbon black.
A 2016 study reported on workers in a large-scale MWCNT manufacturing facility in Russia with relatively high occupational exposure levels, finding that exposure to MWCNTs caused significant increase in several inflammatory cytokines and other biomarkers for interstitial lung disease" ~ from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_impact_of_fullerenes
See also: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2013-145/
Last edited:
Radim
0
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,458
- Points
- 83
Yeah, fullerens are cool as well. Still more studies are needed to get some conclusions about health effects IMO. As nanostructures might have very complex effects in such a system as human body. Thanks for adding this information.
BTW when I was deciding where to go for university studies I considered and was accepted also to nanotechnology, which was that year just openned in my city. Another options for me were optics and optometry, mathematics, physics and nuclear physics at some other unis.
Long time ago...
BTW when I was deciding where to go for university studies I considered and was accepted also to nanotechnology, which was that year just openned in my city. Another options for me were optics and optometry, mathematics, physics and nuclear physics at some other unis.
Long time ago...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
- Points
- 0
Opps I forgot to say "long term"......
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
Precisely.
Diamond aside, the carbon allotropes are all quite similar on a small scale.
Grind up carbon rod into the "fine particles suggested above, and you basically get soot.
Grind up charcoal into the "fine particles" suggested above, and you basically get soot.
Grind up graphene into the "fine particles" suggested above, and you basically get soot.
Grind up graphite into the "fine particles" suggested above, and you basically get soot.
Nano-tubes would be no different.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
- Points
- 0
The point is they are not ground up.....
