Nitrogen 'Diamond' Created

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Tuesday October 12, 2004 @06:12AM from the squish dept.

Sensible Clod writes "Researchers of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry have synthesized a new form of nitrogen, with a stucture like that of diamond. This was accomplished by means of a crushing force (>110 GPa) at extremely high temperature (2000 K), of course. The result, according to PhysOrg, is a very hard crystal with a lot of energy stored in it, which leads to the possibility of using it as a non-polluting fuel or high-explosive."

26 of 73 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Properties? by justanyone · 2004-10-12 06:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Several Questions:
1. Translucent?
2. Melting point?
3. Stable at STP ?
4. Does It Burn if I touch a match to it? Explode?
5. Does it resemble N2, which is stable, or not?
6. What is the hardness level (Mohr's scale) ?
7. Will it degrade over time under exposure to water?
8. Is the method for creating it highly expensive or could this be scaled up?
9. If it is explosive, how do we store it safely?
10. What are the mechanical properties? If it's stable and otherwise useful, will it vibrate with a piezoelectric effect?
11. Is it a semiconductor, conductor, or insulator?
12. Does it lase (can we use it as a pump medium for a laser) ?

--
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
1. Re:Properties? by the+morgawr · 2004-10-12 06:23 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  From reading the article, it doesn't sound like they've gotten the material to stay that way at room temperature and pressure yet, so measuring much that stuff would be difficult.
  
  --
  The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
2. Re:Properties? by Kozar_The_Malignant · 2004-10-12 07:02 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  From the article:
  "First of all, we should try to recover the compound to ambient temperature and pressure", Eremets says.
  
  Translation: "It spontaneously goes poof (or kaboom) when we release the pressure in the machine."
  
  --
  Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
3. Re:Properties? by Shadow+Wrought · 2004-10-12 07:27 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Just mod the answers down now. It'll be easier for all conerned...
  Several Questions: 1. Translucent?
  No but it is transqwest.
  2. Melting point??
  Typically comes after an expensive dinner and a little champagne.
  3. Stable at STP ??
  No but it does keep horses in the Quaker State.
  4. Does It Burn if I touch a match to it? Explode??
  Only when the match is lit.
  5. Does it resemble N2, which is stable, or not??
  It more closely resembles Not, stability notwithstanding.
  6. What is the hardness level (Mohr's scale) ??
  It rates a 2.7 on the Less is Mohr scale.
  7. Will it degrade over time under exposure to water??
  Sort of. It gets these prune like wrinkles in its outer fringes...
  8. Is the method for creating it highly expensive or could this be scaled up??
  Cheaper than antimatter, but more expensive than pirated CD's.
  9. If it is explosive, how do we store it safely??
  We'll figure that out once we have them produced in order to build on the success of our nuclear storage program.
  10. What are the mechanical properties? If it's stable and otherwise useful, will it vibrate with a piezoelectric effect??
  As for the former, it owns two car repair joints over on the East Side, as to the latter, uhhhhh, sure.
  11. Is it a semiconductor, conductor, or insulator??
  It has a part time gig with the Philharmonic, so it is a semi-conductor.
  12. Does it lase (can we use it as a pump medium for a laser) ?
  It lazes very well, especially on Sundays during football season.
  
  --
  If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
4. Re:Properties? by nartz · 2004-10-12 17:00 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  9. If it is explosive, how do we store it safely??
  In Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Or better yet... by El · 2004-10-12 06:20 · Score: 4, Funny

"Here honey, but this diamond ring on and then go punch that wall..."

--
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
But the trick is always... by Banner · 2004-10-12 06:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

Getting the energy out in a controllable stream, not all at once. It's not the storage of energy that is ever the issue: Capacitors and high-explosives store lots. It's just getting it out the way you want it that is the trick.
1. Re:But the trick is always... by Ayaress · 2004-10-12 07:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I guess that's why they listed high explosive among the uses. Even if you can't control the blast whatsoever, if it blows up, you can find a use for it.
2. Re:But the trick is always... by iwadasn · 2004-10-12 10:13 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  High explosives don't store that much. If I remember correctly, TNT for instance has less energy than gasoline. It's not so much about the quantity of energy in an explosive, but rather the rate at which it can be released.
Fuel? Baah. by arkham6 · 2004-10-12 06:24 · Score: 5, Funny

A fuel? How much less energy do you get out from it than was put into it? It seems like a very difficult way of wasting energy.
1. Re:Fuel? Baah. by JohnPM · 2004-10-12 10:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Think rocket fuel. The weight is critical to how much fuel you'll need. Lighter fuels are invaluable even if it takes heaps of energy to generate them.
  
  --
  Karma police, I've given all I can, it's not enough, I've given all I can, but we're still on the payroll.
Reminds me of... by reverseengineer · 2004-10-12 06:39 · Score: 5, Interesting

This seems somewhat like a what a polymerized azide ((N3)- ion)compound would be like, perhaps with many similar properties- I can see the uses as a high explosive, as sodium azide is generally the explosive in airbags- a couple grams of the salt is sufficient to generate over 50L of nitrogen gas quite rapidly. The rearrangement of this network solid into triple-bonded gas molecules should release an enormous amount of energy. I wonder if this is nearly as sensitive to shock as the azides are though.

--
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
1. Re:Reminds me of... by cryptochrome · 2004-10-12 07:11 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Well there is also the slight problem with the fact that azides are EXTREEEEMLY nasty. Here's the short warning:
  
  Sodium azide is extremely toxic (LD50 oral [rat] 27mg/kg) and a powerful poison. Ingesting very small amounts can cause death in a short period of time. When mixed with water or an acid, sodium azide changes rapidly to a toxic gas with a pungent odor. However, the odor may not be sharp enough to give people sufficient warning as to the hazard. When heated to its decomposition temperature of ~275C, sodium azide may undergo violent decomposition. Additional hazards: Sodium azide also changes into a toxic gas when it comes in contact with solid metals. Sodium azide reacts violently with nitric acid, bromine, carbon disulfide, dimethylsulfate, and several heavy metals including copper and lead. Never flush sodium azide (solid or concentrated solution) down the drain -- the azide can react with lead or copper in the drain lines and explode. Do not store on metal shelves or use metal items to handle sodium azide (i.e., spatulas). Contact with metal shelves, containers, and utensils can result in formation of heavy metal azides and the risk of explosion.
  
  Most of these issues stem from the fact that azide packs a very large amount of energy in a very reactive compound. I would imagine nitrodiamond dust could have issues as well. Although a state change between the solid and gas forms would produce no pollution, it could potentially be reactive with other compounds, like oxygen and carbon dioxide.
  
  --
  ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
2. Re:Reminds me of... by Muhammar · 2004-10-12 20:58 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You are exaggerating wildly. I work with sodium azide frequently and it is not terribly dangerous or poisonous material.
  Extremely toxic is stuff that will make you ill (dead) from ingestion/inhalation of tiny amounts - like from having few whifs of vapor, licking your fingers or spilling few drops on your sleeve. Or something that accumulates over repeated exposure. If the tox from rat scales to human, 27mg/kg 50% mortality means that a grown man (80kg) would have to ingest something like 2g of the stuff for having a 50% chance of getting stiff. It is hard to ingest such amount without doing it on purpose. You can find much worse stuff than azide in a normal lab.
  
  As far as not using metalic spatulas for sodium azide, this is way overboard. Copper and other heavy metal azides are very impact sensitive but their formation because of stainless steel spatula is not an issue. Bulk storage (preferably not in a metal drum) is another thing.
  
  Every bottle of chemicals in US has wildly exaggerated warnings because of manufacturers liability. Acetylosalicylic acid (=aspirin) has warning: toxic-target nerves, thyroid. Benzaldehyde (food and fragrance almond flavor, present in cherry cola, soap and champoo) is labeled highly toxic if you buy it as chemical. Bottle of pure sand has warning "this material is known to state of California to cause cancer" etc.
  
  --
  I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
fuel, my ass! by museumpeace · 2004-10-12 07:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

This is like Bush talking about using hydrogen to solve the looming oil shortages...
How much energy do you put in to the process and the material compared to the amount you can get out of it? These uneconomical fuels are a half assed notion that only have real applications where weight or efficiency are hard constraints and money is not, i.e. space craft propulsion.

--
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
1. Re:fuel, my ass! by j_cavera · 2004-10-12 07:39 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Fuel as in energy storage, not energy generation. Fossil fuels give net energy (but not by much) because they naturally exist in an unstable state. Nitrogen naturally occurs in its most stable state, so no net energy by burning N2. But put it into polymeric form and you have a strained lattice storing tons of energy, read: rocket fuel. As a comparison:
  
  2 H2 + 02 -> 2 H20 12.6 MJ/kg
  N4 -> 2 N2 60 MJ/kg (est.)
  
  Other, even higher energy (non-nuclear) fuels include:
  
  Metallic Hydrogen: 2 H(s) -> H2(g) 138 MJ/kg
  Free-Radical Hydrogen: H + H -> H2 104 MJ/kg
  Metastable Helium: He* -> He 480 MJ/kg
  Ionic Hydrogen: H(+) + H(-) -> H2 835 MJ/kg
  
  As much fun as you can have without going nuclear...
  
  --
  #include "humorous_pop_culture_reference.h"
2. Re:fuel, my ass! by jeif1k · 2004-10-12 08:16 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You're right that hydrogen needs to be generated. The way hydrogen solves the looming oil shortages is by using it for energy storage and transport: the use of hydrogen allows solar and wind energy to be generated where they can be generated efficiently and then safely shipped to where they are needed.
3. Re:fuel, my ass! by Vellmont · 2004-10-12 10:31 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Not to pic nits, but fuels can be used to produce energy because they're not in the lowest energy state, not because of instability. Endothermic reactions can result from instability, but absorb energy.
  
  --
  AccountKiller
4. Re:fuel, my ass! by museumpeace · 2004-10-12 11:05 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  ...Polymeric nitrogen will (hopefully) be stable once released from captivity. No one knows for sure though ...
  
  OK, you do the experiment, I'll read [or hear] the report;)
  
  --
  SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
5. Re:fuel, my ass! by Christopher+Thomas · 2004-10-13 03:23 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Other, even higher energy (non-nuclear) fuels include:
  
  Metallic Hydrogen: 2 H(s) -> H2(g) 138 MJ/kg
  Free-Radical Hydrogen: H + H -> H2 104 MJ/kg
  Metastable Helium: He* -> He 480 MJ/kg
  Ionic Hydrogen: H(+) + H(-) -> H2 835 MJ/kg
  
  It occurs to me that if you're prepared to use magnetic confinement to store reagent ions, you can get an Isp as high as you like by using electrons and fully- (or just deeply-) ionized heavy atoms.
  
  Hydrogen's ionization potential of 13.6 eV gives 1.3 GJ/kg on recombination.
  Helium's ioniztion potentials of 24.5 and 54.4 eV give 1.9 GJ/kg.
  Fully-ionized carbon gives 8.3 GJ/kg.
  
  While magnetic confinement only allows low storage densities, with enough energy, this stops mattering. The only catch is that you have to have to be able to do something useful with the resulting photons (i.e. use them to heat an exhaust plasma, or in the worst case power an electric drive, though conversion efficiencies bite you there, as these photons are mostly soft x-rays).
  
  For very heavy elements, with inner-shell electrons orbiting fast enough to be relativistic, you can get energy to mass ratios almost as good as fusion (one to two orders of magnitude worse).
  
  Of course, ionized hydrogen has the virtue of being stable as crystal defects in frozen helium, unlike more aggressively ionized elements (though storing it like that gives a hefty Isp penalty).
Hmm by Couldn'tCareLess · 2004-10-12 07:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

"which leads to the possibility of using it as a non-polluting fuel or high-explosive."
I wonder which one will get funding...
Drilling? by Paster+Of+Muppets · 2004-10-12 07:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

How about using it as a tip for drilling? If so, you'd need to work out how much pressure it could sustain, as well as its hardness factor (on the Mohs Hardness Scale). If it would have explosive tendencies at high pressure, I suggest it not be used to drill for oil. However, it could replace natural diamond to drill for metals, provided it is "harder" than them. If it should explode while drilling for metals, this could be rather useful...

--
Due to lack of disk space this user has been discontinued
Do Not Taunt! by justanyone · 2004-10-12 07:35 · Score: 4, Funny

Do Not Taunt Super-Happy-Fun-sodiumazide.

--
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
Re:non polluting fuel my ass by EdwardElric · 2004-10-12 07:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Every fuel takes more energy to produce than you can get out of it. This will be true whether the fuel is ethanol or anti-matter. It's the second law of thermodynamics.

What makes a fuel non-polluting is the waste products. A fuel that, when used, gives off water is non-polluting compared to a fuel that gives off carbon monoxide. In this case, if the polymeric nitrogen could be converted to the more stable triple-bonded molecule, you would get common molecular nitrogen and a lot of energy. Thus, this has the potential to be a non-polluting fuel source.
Re:lol - what a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-12 07:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

Better yet, don't call her a "bitch" and then maybe she might not leave your ass and take half your shit!
Why is it diamond like? by manganese4 · 2004-10-12 13:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

From the pictures each nitrogen unit cell appears planar and the polymer appears in sheets, much more like graphite than diamond.

--
I make my face look like this and concerned words come out.