Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Astronomers Find Diamond Star 4,000 km Wide

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the sharon-osborne-summoned dept.

tclas writes "The cosmic diamond is a chunk of crystallized carbon, 4,000 km across, some 50 light-years from the Earth in the constellation Centaurus. It's the compressed heart of an old star that was once bright like our Sun but has since faded and shrunk. Astronomers have decided to call the star 'Lucy,' after the Beatles song 'Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.'"

14 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. Finally by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

    De Beers will be funding NASA from now on!

    1. Re:Finally by AstroMatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except white dwarf interiors will also have lots of oxygen atoms, and the lattice structure (BCC) is different from that of diamonds (interpenetrating FCC). And if you remove the self gravity the white dwarf matter would no longer be crystallized. And this story dates from 2004 - breaking news! Definitely slashdot-worthy ...

  2. 4km or 4,000km wide? by maroberts · · Score: 3, Informative

    If its only 4km I'll let you have it.....

    P.S. This BBC story is from 2004 - slow news day, Slashdot?

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  3. Slow day, Slashdot? by AndyFewt · · Score: 4, Informative

    BBC news article: Last Updated: Monday, 16 February 2004, 15:31 GMT
    Over 6 years old, slow day slashdot?

  4. Great... by mseidl · · Score: 5, Funny

    Something else I can't afford but my wife will nag me about...

  5. Garbage by __aaelyr464 · · Score: 5, Funny

    DeBeers has taught me that the only REAL diamond is from mined from the earth, possibly covered in blood.

  6. 6 year old Dupe by SMoynihan · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a story from 2004, though it keeps popping up in the "most read" list on BBC news. Also, it was reported on Slashdot 6 years ago.

  7. CmdrTaco, considered living in a GROUP HOME? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gone senile? Got amnesia, you old douche?
     
    THIS ARTICLE is SIX YEARS OLD.

  8. Re:That's not how they work by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, I don't think De Beers will be funding NASA. They may start blowing up any attempts to get into space. They might even want to take out the ISS (and as anyone who has seen Congo can tell you, with De Beers' massive diamond-powered lasers, the ISS is a sitting duck!) You see, they already have enough (should I say more than enough) diamonds. They just have to stop everyone else from getting access to diamonds, which would cause the price to fall.

    --
    I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
  9. Re:Blood diamond? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a URL for you, but cannot post it because I am at work.

    The first part is the name of a domesticated animal of the Bovidae family. The second part (appended immediately to the previous word) is the TLD for Sweden. The TLD for the domain is the NYSE abbreviation for Cemex SAB de CV.

    Hope this helps.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  10. FIFTY-SIX by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

    But the story is not six years old. The diamond is fifty light years away.

    "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" is from 1967. The light they saw six years ago was from about 1954.

    It pre-dates Lucy by about 13 years.

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
    1. Re:FIFTY-SIX by numbski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We're splitting hairs. With the exception of the Sun, moon, and some VERY near planet/stars, every time we look up at the sky, we're looking a looooong way back into the past. Just about everything you see in the sky "happened" a long time ago. Part of the reason that SETI isn't likely to succeed. Not that it isn't a valiant effort, but anything we would "hear" would be from so long ago that the civilization we're hearing may not even exist anymore, and inversely, anyone that might "hear" our RF transmissions will not have heard them yet, and won't for a good time to come still, and when they do, they're going to "hear" Howdy Doody. Our society has evolved and advanced quit a bit since that point, and if they were to reply with similar tech hoping to communicate, we won't be receiving that transmission for quite some time past *that*.

      In short, our entire existence is so transient that, although it is great hubris to think we're alone, the end result is the same. We probably *are not* alone, but we'll very likely never meet any "others".

      This whole discussion always sets me back into depression, realizing how short and pointless our own existence is. We scramble around, trying to be the best amongst our own, and sadly the whole thing is no different that a bunch of ants scurrying around in a pile. The only difference is scale. We arrive, we're lucky to be here more than 60 years or so, and then we're gone. We don't get to keep any of it, we don't get anything. We exist to not exist anymore. The concept of life is really sad - you become cognizant of "self" only to realize that it is so temporary that well - anyway. Religion (in my case, Christianity) winds up speaking to this by saying in essence "you don't have to die". I struggle because believing that is to say that all of what I see above my head that happened so long ago - the one that made all of *that* somehow, someway, some*why*, inserted themselves into our existence to teach us some 2000 years ago (still, long after what we see above our heads happened), then allowed the collective "us" of a very small group of humans to murder him, and then revived three days later to pay for things the collective "we" had done wrong, so that "we" would no longer have to sacrifice the lives of other things in order to live past death.

      My analytical brain just about bursts at the conflict. I can only envision God as a creator of either the "multiverse" (string theory), or just "our" universe/reality - which makes us more like rats in a cage, and even then, the compartmentalization of my psyche which wants to have faith and follow my upbringing and "believe and be saved" while all the while learning all that I can while I'm here so it can all just go away anyway.

      The "human condition" is a term that gets used when you're young, and then it hits you what precisely it is. Let's not split hairs over time. On the scale of time we're dealing with, you and I are a single "tick" on that clock.

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  11. impossible by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is obviously a hoax. Any early elementary school student can tell you that "diamond" and "star" are two entirely different shapes.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  12. completely different by phlegmofdiscontent · · Score: 3, Informative

    Besides being old, the article is inaccurate. What we consider a diamond consists of a lattice of carbon atoms linked by covalent bonds. This, quite simply, would not support itself against its own gravity. White dwarfs are made up of electron degenerate matter, supported by the Pauli exclusion principle. Electrons can only withstand being compressed to a certain point under this principle and that pressure offsets the inward pressure due to gravity. Covalent bonds as in a diamond would break down long before that. Yes, the star may be 100% carbon, but that doesn't make it a diamond. It's akin to saying graphite is the same as diamond since they're both 100% carbon. A carbon white dwarf is a completely different state of matter than a diamond.