Re:Quality of computer
by
Blackbox42
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Read the article.
This company makes the material. It's similar to the guys who make silicon wafers now. They won't design chips, they will just sell carbon to both Intel and Motorola (or whoever is around at the time).
Don't Buy Diamonds
by
Bonker
·
· Score: 5, Informative
They're not really rare. As the article states, Debeers has a stockpile and controls the supply ruthlessly with tactics that makes Microsoft look like reasonable.
They pretty much ignored an antitrust judgement, have been held responsible for untold exploitation of black African minors, and have been accused of much worse. In the article, one of the interviewees recalls and indirect death threat and treats the journalist with suspicion, fearful that he is an agent of Debeers.
Yes, ladies, we know they look pretty. They may also be more responsible for more terrorism than drugs, certainly more than Bush/Ascroft would like you to beleive.
-- The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Re:Don't Buy Diamonds
by
Jardine
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Isn't that what this is for? Debeers doesn't have a total monopoly on diamonds and I'm pretty sure the Canadian diamond workers are treated better.
Re:Don't Buy Diamonds
by
Jack+William+Bell
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Heh. I bought my fiance, now wife, a moissanite ring partly because of cost and partly because I really didn't want anything to do with giving money to DeBeers. Anita was fine with it, partly because moissanite has a science fiction connection.
No they're not
by
Koushiro
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Actually, the claim that "diamonds are forever" was merely an advertising campaign, albeit a successful one. De Beers started this idea of diamonds being 'forever' as an attempt to sell more diamonds in engagement rings.
De Beers needed a slogan for diamonds that expressed both the theme of romance and legitimacy. An N. W. Ayer copywriter came up with the caption "A Diamond Is Forever," which was scrawled on the bottom of a picture of two young lovers on a honeymoon. Even though diamonds can in fact be shattered, chipped, discolored, or incinerated to ash, the concept of eternity perfectly captured the magical qualities that the advertising agency wanted to attribute to diamonds. Within a year, "A Diamond Is Forever" became the official motto of De Beers.
-- Karma: Oldschool
Re:Not for a while
by
barc0001
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Read the article. One of the cartel guys is so scared by this tech that he was white-faced and shaking by the end of his meeting with Clarke. Another diamond guy told Linares that his father's research was an excellent way to get a bullet in the head.
DeBeers is only where they are because they've had a lock on the supply, and imitations up to this point have been less than convincing. Now we have the real thing, man-made. Especially the vapor process. In fact, the vapor process produces even more perfect diamonds than Mother Nature. DeBeers *should* be scared, since the tech is now in North America and they can't do a damn thing to stop it. In fact, the whole conflict diamond problem is undoubtedly going to be a hindrance to DeBeers trying to badmouth these things. Just think of the upcoming PR:
General Clarke: "These are made by the same processes, and are real carbon diamonds. The structure is the same, it is real. It just took us a lot less time to make" DeBeers: "But *our* diamonds come from our mines in Africa. Surely they're worth more because of that" General Clarke: "How many children were killed because of those African diamonds?" DeBeers: "...but, but, we're sure everyone follows the Kimberly accords..." General Clarke: "Of course. Because bloody military juntas are so concerned with outside trade agreements, right?"
Re:I can see it already
by
yo303
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Debeers owns every diamond producing mine on earth.
Not true. There are lots of non-cartel diamond mines in Australia and Canada.
yo.
Re:Diamonds without guilt
by
WhiteBandit
·
· Score: 4, Informative
2. They can be formed into anything from gemstones to about 4 inch wide(so far) diamond wafers.
Nope. 10 millimeters so far. From page 4 of the article: At the moment, the company is producing 10-millimeter wafers but predicts it will reach an inch square by year's end and 4 inches in five years.
--
"If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
I remember seeing this before
by
poity
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It dealt with the technology behind these diamond presses.
As I remember, they were still having trouble with microscopic CO2 bubbles being trapped in the formed diamonds, which made the product pretty much worthless.
Pretty cool how much the process has improved.
-- your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Re:Hold on there !!!!
by
Rasta+Prefect
·
· Score: 4, Informative
There are a bunch of problems that using a diamond substrate for semiconductors would pose. I mean for one thing, not being a metal but instead a crystal, the resistance to currents is magnitudes greater than for silicon. I agree the thermal properties are grea, but can the other issues be resolved? Long way off folks.
Go get a periodic table and a description of how Semiconductors work.
Silicon isn't really a proper metal. Like carbon, silicon is on the borderline between metals and non-metals. Silicon forms crystals, just like carbon. It's because they form crystals that they function as semi-conductors - Silicon conducts quite poorly on it's own. Only when doped does it become a conductor. When doped with the appropriate substances semi-conductors have either extra valence electrons in the crystalline structure or "holes" where there should be, which serve to carry the current. Doping diamond should work the same way - Same column of the table, same number of valence electrons, similar crystalline structures.
-- Why?
CVD Diamond- I do this.
by
jennygerbi
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Interesting article, but it's missing some of the point. There are two issues here: fabricating substitute "gem" diamonds for jewelry, or fabricating diamond for the semiconductor industry..., or diamond coatings for wear resistance, biocompatible implants, etc. These are an entirely different beast.
CVD diamond, even in with the best of reactors, is limited by growth rates. Working with thin films is, at the moment, the only way to go. You can also only get single crystal diamond by growing on a previously obtained single crystal diamond- as they mention in the article. This is seriously limiting, and they don't mention the growth rates in the article. 5$ a carat is such a BS guess it's not even funny.
CVD diamond grown primarly on Si wafers, and on some specially coated Si wafers, is the way diamond (which is polycrystalline, with different grain sizes giving very different diamond properties) is going to be used in the near to far future. Our group just got a RD 100 award (not that I give that much creedence to those, but it's recognition) for coating 4" wafers with diamond, and we're going up to 8" next year.
The biggest problem is with the electronic properties of the diamond. Sure, it's a great thermal conductor. But... ahem.. it also needs to be a great electical conductor- and have decent mobilities- to be used in actual electronic devices. You can dope diamond with boron to make it p-type, but the conductivity isn't all that high, and the mobility even less, in polycrystalline diamond due to defects and grain boundaries, etc. We've made n-type nanocrystalline diamond with nitrogen, which shouldn't work, but does, and we're still trying to figure out the conduction mechanism.
Thin film diamond is really going to shine for a few particular uses- MEMS (it has extremely low friction/stiction/wear), bio-devices, chemically resistant devices, etc. In all of these cases, even conductive MEMS driven by diamond electronics, borderline and not great electronic properties are fine. (Think Si TFT's for your comptuer display- it's not single crystal Si, obviously, but still has a great potental for other uses.)
There is no way to dope single crystal n-type. People are trying very hard to do this. Some people think they have gotten phosphorous to work slightly, but the growth is very difficult, and the work hard to reproduce. (our doping probably occurs in the grain boundaries, and we think we have actual grain boundary conduction vs. traditional doping processes.) That is a far bigger barrier than just growing BIG DIAMONDS. This article is just some PR spin press release that doesn't really say anything. (As I get more jaded, I see that that is all they really ever are). Just because you can't make Intel processors out of diamond doesn't mean you can't utilize diamond for a large number of exciting applications.
Remember: bigger is not better. Although I personally do like the idea of freaking out DeBeers.
Pull me a diamond boule, and I"ll be impressed.
-j, postdoc at your favorite national lab.
Re:CVD Diamond- I do this.
by
BabyP
·
· Score: 5, Informative
RTFA...or, to save you the trouble, from the fifth page of the article:
The third big challenge has been the most daunting for materials scientists: To form microchip circuits, positive and negative conductors are needed. Diamond is an inherent insulator - it doesn't conduct electricity. But both Gemesis and Apollo have been able to inject boron into the lattice, which creates a positive charge. Until now, though, no one had been able to manufacture a negatively charged, or n-type, diamond with sufficient conductivity. When I visit Butler in Washington, he can barely contain his glee. "There's been a major breakthrough," he tells me. In June, together with scientists from Israel and France, he announced a novel way of inverting boron's natural conductivity to form a boron-doped n-type diamond. "We now have a p-n junction," Butler says. "Which means that we have a diamond semiconductor that really works. I can now see an Intel diamond Pentium chip on the horizon."
Re:CVD Diamond- I do this.
by
pavera
·
· Score: 4, Informative
In the last page of the article they mention that the CVD process grows the diamond "brick" at.5 millimeters a day, if thats not a growth rate what is?
Re:The reverse IS true!
by
Daniel_Staal
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Luster is a function of the cut (or shape) of the gem and its refract index. A diamond has a refract index of around 2.42, while moissanite has a refract index 2.67.
The difference can be shown fairly easily in a ray-tracing program: just build a model in a jewel cut and set it to have varying refract indices, rendering for each one. Be aware that you'll have to set the 'number of bounces' as high as you can get it to see the full effect...
My little research on the topic says which is 'better' depends on lighting (moissanite is slightly colored, which shows in certain lights) and taste.
-- 'Sensible' is a curse word.
Japanese research?
by
flyingroc
·
· Score: 3, Informative
A bit of googling turned out this page with pictures of artificial diamond gems, and wafers. Seems like Sumitomo Electric has some wafers larger than the few milimiters mentioned in the article.
I wonder how far along the Japanese are in this research...
I think they are fragile
by
r6144
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Diamonds are IMHO extremely fragile. Would you want to use a glass knife to cut pork? If you are a little bit less than careful it would break and hurt you. If the bottom of a frying pan is fragile you will have a hard time moving stuff around in it. I guess diamond cookware would have the same disadvantages.
Re:Diamonds inorganic?
by
mikerich
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I've always wondered this. Diamond is referred to as inorganic. Organic means "carbon based". What am I missing?
It's actually quite a good question.
I can tell you specifically why diamond is not organic with a quick definition that organic chemistry is the study of compounds containing carbon. Diamond is a giant molecule of elemental carbon, so it is firmly inorganic.
Although that definition isn't perfect, some compounds such as carbon dioxide are also considered inorganic.
Some people say that organic chemistry requires a molecule to possess carbon-hydrogen bonds - but that is wrong as well. Tetrachloromethane (CCl4) - dry cleaning fluid - is firmly organic but with no hygrogen atoms to be found in the molecule.
Which leads me to conclude that organic chemistry is the study of carbon compounds - except carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and carbides.
Doubtless there are further exceptions.
Best wishes,
Mike.
Re:Gemstones as investments.
by
dasmegabyte
·
· Score: 3, Informative
And let's not forget where the diamonds come from: slave and near slave labor in the darkest regions on the world, supporting some of the richest men. Diamonds are as bad as indigo and spice in the 18th century. But of course, DeBeers dumps so much money into the television chances are you've never heard of it. Programming that exposes the human rights issues surrounding diamond mining and transportation is like derailing a money train.
Check out the national geographic article on the subject from last year. It's very thorough.
Which is why I couldn't conscionably give my wife a diamond engagement ring (she also flat out told me not to). "Here, a symbol of our love: torture, murder and a massive corporate cartel." I got her a sapphire instead, and let me tell you, 2 months salary buys a HUGE fuck-off sapphire.
I would love to see chemical diamonds more perfect than their foreign counterparts take over the world. I would love to see debeers falter and their practices exposed --- soon as that advertising budget goes away, this will be front page shit. I would love to see the end to strip mining and jacked up monopolies.
Re:The Heat Issue
by
avandesande
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Heat begets heat... Because of localized heating, you have to run higher voltages (to overcome resistance) which creates more heat... Using diamond will actually decrease voltages and heat.
diamonds are not really forever
at the bottom there is a link to the next part...
You can't handle the truth.
Read the article.
This company makes the material. It's similar to the guys who make silicon wafers now. They won't design chips, they will just sell carbon to both Intel and Motorola (or whoever is around at the time).
They're not really rare. As the article states, Debeers has a stockpile and controls the supply ruthlessly with tactics that makes Microsoft look like reasonable.
They pretty much ignored an antitrust judgement, have been held responsible for untold exploitation of black African minors, and have been accused of much worse. In the article, one of the interviewees recalls and indirect death threat and treats the journalist with suspicion, fearful that he is an agent of Debeers.
Yes, ladies, we know they look pretty. They may also be more responsible for more terrorism than drugs, certainly more than Bush/Ascroft would like you to beleive.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Karma: Oldschool
Read the article. One of the cartel guys is so scared by this tech that he was white-faced and shaking by the end of his meeting with Clarke. Another diamond guy told Linares that his father's research was an excellent way to get a bullet in the head.
DeBeers is only where they are because they've had a lock on the supply, and imitations up to this point have been less than convincing. Now we have the real thing, man-made. Especially the vapor process. In fact, the vapor process produces even more perfect diamonds than Mother Nature. DeBeers *should* be scared, since the tech is now in North America and they can't do a damn thing to stop it. In fact, the whole conflict diamond problem is undoubtedly going to be a hindrance to DeBeers trying to badmouth these things. Just think of the upcoming PR:
General Clarke: "These are made by the same processes, and are real carbon diamonds. The structure is the same, it is real. It just took us a lot less time to make"
DeBeers: "But *our* diamonds come from our mines in Africa. Surely they're worth more because of that"
General Clarke: "How many children were killed because of those African diamonds?"
DeBeers: "...but, but, we're sure everyone follows the Kimberly accords..."
General Clarke: "Of course. Because bloody military juntas are so concerned with outside trade agreements, right?"
yo.
Look into Canadian diamonds.
2. They can be formed into anything from gemstones to about 4 inch wide(so far) diamond wafers.
Nope. 10 millimeters so far.
From page 4 of the article:
At the moment, the company is producing 10-millimeter wafers but predicts it will reach an inch square by year's end and 4 inches in five years.
"If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
on NOVA a few years back..
It dealt with the technology behind these diamond presses.
As I remember, they were still having trouble with microscopic CO2 bubbles being trapped in the formed diamonds, which made the product pretty much worthless.
Pretty cool how much the process has improved.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Go get a periodic table and a description of how Semiconductors work.
Silicon isn't really a proper metal. Like carbon, silicon is on the borderline between metals and non-metals. Silicon forms crystals, just like carbon. It's because they form crystals that they function as semi-conductors - Silicon conducts quite poorly on it's own. Only when doped does it become a conductor. When doped with the appropriate substances semi-conductors have either extra valence electrons in the crystalline structure or "holes" where there should be, which serve to carry the current. Doping diamond should work the same way - Same column of the table, same number of valence electrons, similar crystalline structures.
Why?
Interesting article, but it's missing some of the point. There are two issues here: fabricating substitute "gem" diamonds for jewelry, or fabricating diamond for the semiconductor industry..., or diamond coatings for wear resistance, biocompatible implants, etc. These are an entirely different beast.
CVD diamond, even in with the best of reactors, is limited by growth rates. Working with thin films is, at the moment, the only way to go. You can also only get single crystal diamond by growing on a previously obtained single crystal diamond- as they mention in the article. This is seriously limiting, and they don't mention the growth rates in the article. 5$ a carat is such a BS guess it's not even funny.
CVD diamond grown primarly on Si wafers, and on some specially coated Si wafers, is the way diamond (which is polycrystalline, with different grain sizes giving very different diamond properties) is going to be used in the near to far future. Our group just got a RD 100 award (not that I give that much creedence to those, but it's recognition) for coating 4" wafers with diamond, and we're going up to 8" next year.
The biggest problem is with the electronic properties of the diamond. Sure, it's a great thermal conductor. But... ahem.. it also needs to be a great electical conductor- and have decent mobilities- to be used in actual electronic devices. You can dope diamond with boron to make it p-type, but the conductivity isn't all that high, and the mobility even less, in polycrystalline diamond due to defects and grain boundaries, etc. We've made n-type nanocrystalline diamond with nitrogen, which shouldn't work, but does, and we're still trying to figure out the conduction mechanism.
Thin film diamond is really going to shine for a few particular uses- MEMS (it has extremely low friction/stiction/wear), bio-devices, chemically resistant devices, etc. In all of these cases, even conductive MEMS driven by diamond electronics, borderline and not great electronic properties are fine. (Think Si TFT's for your comptuer display- it's not single crystal Si, obviously, but still has a great potental for other uses.)
There is no way to dope single crystal n-type. People are trying very hard to do this. Some people think they have gotten phosphorous to work slightly, but the growth is very difficult, and the work hard to reproduce. (our doping probably occurs in the grain boundaries, and we think we have actual grain boundary conduction vs. traditional doping processes.) That is a far bigger barrier than just growing BIG DIAMONDS. This article is just some PR spin press release that doesn't really say anything. (As I get more jaded, I see that that is all they really ever are). Just because you can't make Intel processors out of diamond doesn't mean you can't utilize diamond for a large number of exciting applications.
Remember: bigger is not better. Although I personally do like the idea of freaking out DeBeers.
Pull me a diamond boule, and I"ll be impressed.
-j, postdoc at your favorite national lab.
Luster is a function of the cut (or shape) of the gem and its refract index. A diamond has a refract index of around 2.42, while moissanite has a refract index 2.67.
The difference can be shown fairly easily in a ray-tracing program: just build a model in a jewel cut and set it to have varying refract indices, rendering for each one. Be aware that you'll have to set the 'number of bounces' as high as you can get it to see the full effect...
My little research on the topic says which is 'better' depends on lighting (moissanite is slightly colored, which shows in certain lights) and taste.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
A bit of googling turned out this page with pictures of artificial diamond gems, and wafers. Seems like Sumitomo Electric has some wafers larger than the few milimiters mentioned in the article.
I wonder how far along the Japanese are in this research...
Diamonds are IMHO extremely fragile. Would you want to use a glass knife to cut pork? If you are a little bit less than careful it would break and hurt you. If the bottom of a frying pan is fragile you will have a hard time moving stuff around in it. I guess diamond cookware would have the same disadvantages.
It's actually quite a good question.
I can tell you specifically why diamond is not organic with a quick definition that organic chemistry is the study of compounds containing carbon. Diamond is a giant molecule of elemental carbon, so it is firmly inorganic.
Although that definition isn't perfect, some compounds such as carbon dioxide are also considered inorganic.
Some people say that organic chemistry requires a molecule to possess carbon-hydrogen bonds - but that is wrong as well. Tetrachloromethane (CCl4) - dry cleaning fluid - is firmly organic but with no hygrogen atoms to be found in the molecule.
Which leads me to conclude that organic chemistry is the study of carbon compounds - except carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and carbides.
Doubtless there are further exceptions.
Best wishes,
Mike.
And let's not forget where the diamonds come from: slave and near slave labor in the darkest regions on the world, supporting some of the richest men. Diamonds are as bad as indigo and spice in the 18th century. But of course, DeBeers dumps so much money into the television chances are you've never heard of it. Programming that exposes the human rights issues surrounding diamond mining and transportation is like derailing a money train.
Check out the national geographic article on the subject from last year. It's very thorough.
Which is why I couldn't conscionably give my wife a diamond engagement ring (she also flat out told me not to). "Here, a symbol of our love: torture, murder and a massive corporate cartel." I got her a sapphire instead, and let me tell you, 2 months salary buys a HUGE fuck-off sapphire.
I would love to see chemical diamonds more perfect than their foreign counterparts take over the world. I would love to see debeers falter and their practices exposed --- soon as that advertising budget goes away, this will be front page shit. I would love to see the end to strip mining and jacked up monopolies.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Heat begets heat...
Because of localized heating, you have to run higher voltages (to overcome resistance) which creates more heat...
Using diamond will actually decrease voltages and heat.
love is just extroverted narcissism