Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Worlds First Plastic Magnets

Posted by timothy on from the self-destructing-credit-cards dept.

CrashRide writes: "Came across this story at www.sciencedaily.com about the worlds first plastic magnet. Not too useful for day-to-day stuff yet -- 'magnetic polymers are unstable unless they are in an oxygen-free environment at temperatures below 10 degrees Kelvin (more than 440 degrees below zero Fahrenheit; absolute zero, the point at which all motion stops, is zero degrees Kelvin)' but the possibilites are interesting."

24 comments

  1. *Degrees* Kelvin? by Red+Moose · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just to be bitching, there are no "degrees" Kelvin, they are just called Kelvin. It's just "below 10 Kelvin". At least that's something I remember from 10 years ago........

    --

    Acting stupid isn't much fun when there's someone around who knows better

    1. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by Eric+Smith · · Score: 2

      And to be really really picky, it's "below 10 kelvins", just like you would say "below 10 volts" or "below 10 grams". It's not capitalized, and when you're talking about more than one of them it gains an "s" for the plural form.

    2. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by PD · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the clarification. I think the readers should understand one thing: these magnets are not for the outside of your refridgerator. They are for the inside of your refridgerator.

      --
      If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
    3. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      That's SOME fridge to be able to freeze to > 10 K

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    4. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by PD · · Score: 2, Funny

      What are you talking about? Even an oven can freeze to greater than 10K.

      --
      If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
    5. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      D'oh!

      The aligator eats the bigger number... gotta remember that.

      How'd I ever get through algebra let alone calculus?? ;-)

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    6. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by martyn+s · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, actually, you're wrong. 10 Kelvin is a specific point on the temperature range. It's not a quantity. As I learned it, you say 10 degrees celsius when relating a temperature, since 10 degrees celsius is a specific temperature. But when relating the difference between two temperatures you say "A is 10 Celsius degrees higher than B." A Celsius degree is a difference in temperature. A degree Celsius refers to a specific temperature.

      So 10 Kelvin is correct. To say a difference in temperature with kelvin you might say "60 Kelvin is 10 kelvins more than 50 kelvins."

      And just for the record a Celsius degree is the same as a Kelvin (difference in temperature). The Kelvin and Celsius scales are the same, except Celsius is shifted up 273 Celsius degrees.

    7. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by PD · · Score: 2

      How'd I ever get through algebra let alone calculus?? ;-)

      Probably like I did. Take every class twice. :-)

      --
      If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
    8. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by friscolr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "60 Kelvin is 10 kelvins more than 50 kelvins."

      why wouldn't it be "60 Kelvin is 10 kelvins more than 50 Kelvin." since 50 Kelvin is a specific point on the temperature range as well?
      what's the difference between lower and upper case - kelvin and Kelvin?

      --

      -f
      www.blackant.net

    9. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by Eric+Smith · · Score: 2
      It's "60 kelvins is 10 kelvins more than 50 kelvins". Just like "60 volts is 10 volts more than 50 volts" or "60 kilometers is 10 kilometers more than 50 kilometers" or "60 automobiles is 10 automobiles more than 50 automobiles".

      You wouldn't say "60 automobile is 10 automobiles more than 50 automobile", now would you?

    10. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      I got caught up in all the intracacies of my post. I tried proofreading it, but I guess I missed that. You're right, it should've read "60 Kelvin is 10 kelvins more than 50 Kelvin." I'm unclear on whether "kelvins" should be capitalized or not.

    11. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Try reading my post. Yes, "60 kelvins is 10 kelvins more than 50 kelvis," is correct, but it has a different meaning than "60 Kelvin is 10 kelvins more than 50 Kelvin."

    12. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by Eric+Smith · · Score: 2
      I did read your post, and I fully understood what you were claiming, and it's just plain wrong, even though some people may say such things.

      The current temperature where I am is 287 kelvins. A claim that the temperature is "287 kelvin" is grammatically incorrect. The only time such a construct would be grammatically correct would be when the temperature is 1 kelvin or less.

      Just as it is correct to say that the temperature is "72 degrees Farenheit", but incorrect to say that the temperature is "72 degree Farenheit".

      Didn't you learn about singular and plural in grade school?

      Have you ever read any peer-reviewed scientific journals? There are occasional mistakes even in those, but usually they get it right.

    13. Re:*Degrees* Kelvin? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the point. The kelvin scale is not made up of degrees. So when you say "287 kelvin," that's shorthand 287 on the kelvin scale. It's not a quantity. Take the richter scale. Normally they say "the earthquake was 7.2 on the richter scale." Something equivalent to that would be "7.2 richter." And even aside from this, suppose we were talking about this with knowledge English grammar and nothing else (as it seems to be in your case). There are irregular plurals.

      Haven't you learned about irregular plurals in grade school?

      I defy you to find three times where a peer-reviewed scientific journal says 72 Kelvins (as a specific temperature) rather than 72 kelvin. And if you read this a month from now, or six, and the discussion is closed, email me at martyn27015@yahoo.com to send me a URL of your findings.

      Have you ever even taken high school chemistry?

  2. some similar research at Ohio State by trip11 · · Score: 2, Informative

    A professor of mine at Ohio State has been doing research in the same field as well. Here's a link to his homepage. here Dr Epstine has also been working on the conducting polimers as well.

  3. Re:plastic magnets?? who gives a FUCK?!?!@ by TheChin · · Score: 0, Troll

    Is this a joke ??
    I mean are you a joke ??
    I mean fuck off yourself!

  4. Ah, good old absolute zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "absolute zero, the point at which all motion stops, is zero degrees Kelvin"

    Not all motion stops at 0 kelvin. There are still little wiggles. Also, kelvin does not come in degrees. It is an SI unit.
    There seems to be a lot of work going into magnetic compunds these days into magnetic stuff of all shapes and forms. I know I worked in a lab interested in this stuff last year.

    1. Re:Ah, good old absolute zero... by TheDick · · Score: 1

      I thought the very difintion of 0 kelvin was that it was absolute zero, the tempature at which all mostion is supposed cease. Maybe not totally achievable (rather 0.0000000001 kelvin or something) but still....

      --

    2. Re:Ah, good old absolute zero... by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Actually, no. All motion stops at 0 kelvin. However, since quantum mechanics, as you pointed out, causes little wiggles, 0 Kelvin is impossible. Zero Kelvin is just a theoretical figure. But Absolute Zero, or 0 kelvin, occurs when all motion stops.

  5. Re:plastic magnets?? who gives a FUCK?!?!@ by TACD · · Score: 1
    Ho ho ho!

    What an odd place to put such a rant, since no mention of Microsoft or the DMCA is anywhere within 5 miles of this page.

    I bet you think you're patriotic.

    --
    Security through promiscuity is no better than security through obscurity.