Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Laser Pointer Store

New material absorbs 99.96% of light, Guinness World Record darkest substance.


Radim

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
1,457
Likes
428
Points
83
Too bad vantablack is extremely expensive--ounce for ounce more than diamond or gold in addition to not being available for private individual purchase.

From Surrey Nanosystems web site:
"In order to comply with UK export control regulations we are required to verify the identity and credentials of potential clients and the nature of their proposed use of Vantablack. If you wish to purchase Vantablack coatings, the following applies:
Only verified companies, research facilities and educational establishments can order a sample of Vantablack. The coating is not available to private individuals at this time and we can’t accept orders from private email addresses. Under current UK Government legislation Vantablack and Vantablack S-VIS require an export licence for generic samples as they have no specific end use function."

The newest spray version is interesting see: https://www.surreynanosystems.com/vantablack-s-vis
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
1,414
Likes
129
Points
0
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.
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

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
1,457
Likes
428
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.
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
13,930
Likes
2,033
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

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
1,457
Likes
428
Points
83
Could be even from beginning of 20th century. These were the times when they became available.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2016
Messages
1,414
Likes
129
Points
0
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.
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:

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
13,930
Likes
2,033
Points
113
Could be even from beginning of 20th century. These were the times when they became available.
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

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
8,092
Likes
690
Points
113
Except for probably being toxic, some of this stuff in a very fine powder dispersed into the air would sure cut down on the visible beam from a laser in a room, wouldn't it.
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!
 

Cyparagon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
9,576
Likes
1,069
Points
113
Except for probably being toxic, some of this stuff in a very fine powder dispersed into the air...
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.

it could be used as a coating for the measurement of light energy and powers.
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
1,414
Likes
129
Points
0
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.
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:

Encap

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
4,647
Likes
1,455
Points
113
Good point, It is a complete unknown how the human body could deal with such a substance,
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.

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.
"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

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
1,457
Likes
428
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. :D Long time ago...
 
Last edited:

Cyparagon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
9,576
Likes
1,069
Points
113
The only thing that could be fragile about carbon nanotubes might be how they are attached to something.....
Precisely.

Carbon nanotubes are nothing like "soot" the same way they are nothing like diamonds or graphite !
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
1,414
Likes
129
Points
0
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.
The point is they are not ground up.....
 




Top