Slashdot Mirror


NASA Creates Super-Black Carbon Nanotube Coating

An anonymous reader writes "NASA has just revealed a new, super-black material, claiming it is the most light absorbent material ever developed, and capable of absorbing 99% of ultraviolet, infrared, far-infrared, and visible light. The super-black material is about 10,000 times thinner than a human hair and created using carbon nanotubes. Those nanotubes are positioned and grown on multiple other materials including silicon, stainless steel, and titanium. The process of applying the coating requires heating the surface up to 1,382 degrees in an oven filled with a 'carbon-coating feedstock gas.' As well as being up to 100x more absorbent than anything that has come before, the coating is significantly lighter than the black paint and epoxy commonly used today to absorb light. Because the light absorption level is so high, the super-black material will also keep temperatures down for the instruments it is used on. And that very high absorption rate brings one final big advantage: it allows measurements to be taken at much greater distances in space because it removes the light emitted from around planets and stars as well as any generally high-contrast area of space."

132 comments

  1. Nanotubes Thet Don't Crack by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Black don't crack. And neither will these nanotubes.

    1. Re:Nanotubes Thet Don't Crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SUPER BLACK

  2. My God... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... it's full of stars!

    1. Re:My God... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dohohoho !

    2. Re:My God... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bwahahahahaha !

  3. Picture by leetrout · · Score: 4, Funny

    Here's a photo of it. In the middle, kinda hard to make out http://f.cl.ly/items/1S2W2w3X0z13450i440Z/black.jpg

    1. Re:Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Magnificient!
      Yep... It's black!

    2. Re:Picture by jamesh · · Score: 3, Funny

      Here's a photo of it. In the middle, kinda hard to make out http://f.cl.ly/items/1S2W2w3X0z13450i440Z/black.jpg

      That's obviously been photoshopped.

    3. Re:Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Looks like Hotblack Desiato's stunt ship.

    4. Re:Picture by mooingyak · · Score: 0

      That's not super black. This is super black.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    5. Re:Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hovered over this link for so long (at work) thinking i bet its goatse.....but i just had to click!

    6. Re:Picture by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      What the hell is that site about?

    7. Re:Picture by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      Hell if I know, but it was the first one that came up when I googled "black superman".

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    8. Re:Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Just.... wow. JPEG, seriously?

    9. Re:Picture by repapetilto · · Score: 1

      Its a good find

    10. Re:Picture by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I feel sick.

      --
      No sig today...
    11. Re:Picture by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2

      Here's a photo of it. In the middle, kinda hard to make out http://f.cl.ly/items/1S2W2w3X0z13450i440Z/black.jpg [f.cl.ly]

      That's obviously been photoshopped.

      You can tell by the nanopixels.

  4. 1,382 degrees F by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since the scale wasn't mentioned, unless you read TFA.

    Hmm. This would be awesomes for people who put solar heat collectors on their roofs in the Great White North. I wonder how soon it can be done affordably.

    Better market prospect for that than Solyndra.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:1,382 degrees F by Commontwist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if this absorbs from ultraviolet to infrared that well then how much heat would it transfer? If you have an air gap of inner and outer walls in a research station in the north or south poles with this material lining the inner wall would it re-absorb much of the lost heat? Would layering this stuff between air gaps suck in more heat than you lose in temperatures that cold?

    2. Re:1,382 degrees F by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if this absorbs from ultraviolet to infrared that well then how much heat would it transfer? If you have an air gap of inner and outer walls in a research station in the north or south poles with this material lining the inner wall would it re-absorb much of the lost heat? Would layering this stuff between air gaps suck in more heat than you lose in temperatures that cold?

      Well, my father, a CE, had a friend who build a large collector for his roof, back in the 1970's. He collected aluminum cans, cut the tops and bottoms off, halved them and anodized the inside of the halves in some fashion. He arranged these as an air path in a frame on the roof of his house, southern exposed and used a small fan to run a current of air through it. Free heating during the day and it worked quite well for far less than running the furnace.

      Forward to today and an enterprising company could get in on the ground floor of this technology and establish itself well before Chinese competitors show up and try to cut their legs off from under them (as happened to Solyndra.)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:1,382 degrees F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Casual mention of Solyndra == 'teabagger'?

      Guess what; controversial topics often provide memes people will occasionally reference. If your training has your knee jerking wildly when you encounter this then that's your problem. Disengage dick mode and stop jumping on people because a blemish was discovered on your preferred politician.

    4. Re:1,382 degrees F by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Informative

      Solyandra wasn't a scandal, it was an attempt to do things right!

      More people realize that than you think. I deal with a couple of people who are big conservative types. You know the business leader/chamber of commerce guys who think everyone should work for minimum wage except "their type" of person and another is a corporate lawyer who "smells the glove" if you get my drift. Even they can't gripe about the Solyndra stuff with a straight face.

      I don't think the GP was necessarily a teabagger, just someone rhetorically sloppy who's probably heard "Solyndra" mentioned a few times and doesn't know any of the background. He probably doesn't take the time to look underneath any of the claims he hears on the corporate media and just repeats what he hears as truth.

      Can we keep the politics out of the science threads, please?

      I understand your frustration, but science and technology are issues where politics are most important. Politics determines everything about the decisions that are made in those areas. We had a bunch down in Mississippi who wanted to have a constitutional amendment saying that personhood begins at conception for chrissake. Forget about any kind of embryonic stem cells, but they would have the bathrooms where women suffer miscarriages treated as crime scenes. A woman with an ectopic pregnancy might be handcuffed to the bed to make sure she doesn't run away to Alabama to get an abortion so she doesn't die. It's gotten to that point. Fortunately, even the far-right folks in Mississippi defeated this measure overwhelmingly, showing that even in ground zero for craziness, there are lines that people won't cross, thank goodness.

      So it's not so much that you don't want politics in science threads, but you don't want dumb AM-radio political nonsense in science threads. If someone wants to say "I don't think it's the place of government to get involved with supporting technology" that's one thing. Saying "there can't be global warming because it was cold last week" is another thing entirely.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:1,382 degrees F by Surt · · Score: 0

      I'm curious. Where exactly do you draw the line for 'life begins', and why?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    6. Re:1,382 degrees F by Surt · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my other reply should have said 'personhood'.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    7. Re:1,382 degrees F by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Where exactly do you draw the line for 'life begins', and why?

      Wherever the mother says it does.

      Because it's hers.

      And don't bother, I won't answer any reductio ad absurdum followup question.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:1,382 degrees F by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Sorry, my other reply should have said 'personhood'.

      Same answer.

      It's entirely in the mother's hands. As it has always been.

      I can tell you this much: nothing that is inside a woman's body can ever be considered a separate person. Until it is born, it is the mother.

      Childbirth is an important event, no matter what the pro-life movement would have you believe. That's when we start counting a human being's age. That's when the child is given a birth certificate. That's when it's a person.

      A fetus becomes a person when it is born. No halfsies, no almost, no "nearly there". Until that time, it is part of the woman's body, and entirely under her dominion. And I don't care if she's 13 or 65.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:1,382 degrees F by jc42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where exactly do you draw the line for 'life begins', and why?

      Well, I don't know what the OP would say, but in scientific circles, the question was quite clearly answered back in the mid-1800s, by Louis Pasteur et al. And the clear answer was: It doesn't. We may not know what happened 4.5 billion years ago when our planet was young, but today it's rather well determined that life only continues as a branch of earlier life.

      This applies to us humans as it does to everything else living on the planet. The instance of fertilization of an ovum by a sperm doesn't create a new life; it merges two previous living creatures into a single living creature. The participants are at all times alive, and no new life is created.

      And note that human ova and sperm are quite definitely human. Straightforward DNA tests will verify this.

      The whole religious issue of when "life" begins is bogus. It doesn't. At least, not on our planet. People who claim it does simply don't understand how our reproductive process works. (This doesn't prevent them from reproducing, of course; they don't need to understand for it to work.)

      Now I'll wander off, humming Every Sperm is Sacred ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    10. Re:1,382 degrees F by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      Spring break as a teenager kinda sticks out in my mind...

      Why??? (lost in happy thoughts)

    11. Re:1,382 degrees F by repapetilto · · Score: 2

      Yes, this guy has it right. "When does life begin" is a dumb question. If it wasn't, people wouldn't be able to argue about it endlessly. As for whether it's "ok" for a host to kill a half-formed human... probably not. But I'll never be a host, so what do I know.

    12. Re:1,382 degrees F by hankwang · · Score: 1

      Would layering this stuff between air gaps suck in more heat than you lose in temperatures that cold?

      Unfortunately not; such a hypothetical material would allow you to create a temperature difference out of nothing. The best way to limit radiative heat transfer is by having two reflective surfaces, such as aluminum foil. In addition to that, you need to prevent heat transfer due to air convection. That's why thermostat flasks are vacuum and shiny on the inside.

    13. Re:1,382 degrees F by Surt · · Score: 1

      Why bother replying at all?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    14. Re:1,382 degrees F by Surt · · Score: 1

      Yes, as I attempted to clarify in the thread, I was really interested in personhood, as that's both what the parent posted about, and what I was actually interested in the answer to. 'life begins' is an unfortunate common proxy for 'personhood begins', and conflating the two makes the science side of the argument useless, so I'm sorry for the habit-typo.

      Personhood is really what's of interest ... when does the thing that could become a person ... do so (and thus obviously gain the rights to protection from murder from our society).

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    15. Re:1,382 degrees F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't be so dumb if "life" was more rigorously defined. I prefer to use "able to procreate" as part of the definition, so that anything that hasn't reached sexual maturity isn't considered alive.

    16. Re:1,382 degrees F by eastlight_jim · · Score: 1

      I did wonder about the exact temperature required and naturally assumed it was a carefully controlled centigrade temperature. Of course, it's just another case of mis-conversion from one unit to another. 1382 F is the exact conversion from 750 C, a value only given to 2 sf. 1400 F would be a more appropriate conversion if you have to convert it at all.

    17. Re:1,382 degrees F by jc42 · · Score: 2

      I prefer to use "able to procreate" as part of the definition, so that anything that hasn't reached sexual maturity isn't considered alive.

      It could be fun to argue for such a definition of "when life begins". It immediately follows from this definition that it's OK to kill a child that hasn't reached puberty. Somehow, I sorta suspect that a lot of people wouldn't be comfortable with this.

      OTOH, there's an old Jewish joke, to the effect that kids aren't considered living human beings until they get their medical or law degree.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    18. Re:1,382 degrees F by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I wonder how soon it can be done affordably.

      Got a kiln capable of a controlled 1382 degrees (Farenheit), and a source of "carbon coating feedstock gas"? Sounds like an extremely affordable process already.

    19. Re:1,382 degrees F by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Because feeding the Trolls is entertaining... if you can keep them outside until sunrise....

    20. Re:1,382 degrees F by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      And 1382F implies a precision that isn't there. I highly doubt the process needs to be heated to the exact degree. This is simply a conversion from 750 degrees Celsius. Most likely 750 is rounded and would be +/-5, which is +/-41 F. If they were going to convert then 1380F would have been more informative or even 1400F.

      The act of conversion from on unit to another does not add precision.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    21. Re:1,382 degrees F by jc42 · · Score: 2

      Personhood is really what's of interest ... when does the thing that could become a person ... do so (and thus obviously gain the rights to protection from murder from our society).

      We might want to be careful with what term we use. Consider that in the US, the legal system has conferred "personhood" on corporations. So in US law, you can be a "person" without even being alive.

      Also, US law clearly doesn't protect a "person" from being murdered. It's perfectly legal for the officers of a corporate person to dissolve the corporation, ending its existence. No court would charge them with murder for such an act. It's also legal for one corporation to buy another and merge with it. If I were to kill and eat you (thus incorporating you into my "personhood"), I'd be definitely charged with a crime, but corporate "persons" do this to each other every day, and nobody blinks an eye.

      So, at least in the US, asking when "personhood" begins might not be at all what you want determined. Under US law, a "person" can be created out of nothing, by filing the appropriate legal papers with the right government agency. Also, such a "person" can be legally owned by another (i.e., held in slavery), and can be destroyed at will.

      Maybe there's a better term, that doesn't already have such a bizarre legal definition.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    22. Re:1,382 degrees F by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Hmm. This would be awesomes for people who put solar heat collectors on their roofs in the Great White North. I wonder how soon it can be done affordably.

      There are already vacuum-evacuated solar-thermal panels for this. With such a system you can use a solar water heater in the arctic (although you might use it to heat the cold water). Of course these may help improve their efficiency.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    23. Re:1,382 degrees F by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "He probably doesn't take the time to look underneath any of the claims he hears on the corporate media and just repeats what he hears as truth."

      and yet, they still get to vote.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    24. Re:1,382 degrees F by geekoid · · Score: 2

      When it is no longer attached to the mother. Until then, it is literally a parasite on the mother until then.

      Pretty simple question to answer rationally.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    25. Re:1,382 degrees F by Surt · · Score: 1

      Sadly, even the mother's rights camp are generally against day before birth abortions. At least if they were in favor of that, they'd have some ideological consistency.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    26. Re:1,382 degrees F by jc42 · · Score: 1

      When it is no longer attached to the mother. Until then, it is literally a parasite on the mother until then. Pretty simple question to answer rationally.

      Actually, that wording doesn't make it simple, either. One reason is that most people who support a mother's right to an abortion (within whatever time limits) will agree that for an outsider to cause the fetus's death without her permission would be a criminal act. There's been lots of case law in lots of countries that deal with this, and courts have pretty much all agreed that, even if an abortion would have been legal, fetal death without the mother's permission isn't abortion, and is a crime if done by an "outsider".

      In many societies, "abortion" has been extended past birth. Thus, newborns with obvious physical defects have often been quietly killed by their family, with no legal repercussions. It's an open secret that newborns are often killed (or sold) in countries that impose draconian limits on children. The most notorious case in recent years has been China, after their "one child" policy was adopted, resulting in a generation of kids that has a serious shortage of females.

      The "parasite" point is of interest to biologists and medical people. One of the outstanding biological questions is based on this. Since a fetus is genetically different from the mother, you'd expect her immune system to recognize it as foreign and try to kill it. This does happen, but there are a lot of poorly-understood "special features" of the mammalian immune system that recognize a fetus as special and allow it to live (and extract nutrition from the host). There is a conjecture that some actual parasites take advantage of this, and fool the immune system into accepting them as a fetus (even in males).

      Anyway, the whole issue isn't all that simple. ( And humans often aren't all that rational. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  5. None more black by Ugarte · · Score: 1

    One of the first uses will be the cover of the "Smell The Glove" re-issue

    1. Re:None more black by bughunter · · Score: 2

      Just in time for Nigel Tufnel Day.

      "It's like, how much more black could this be? And the answer is: 'None. None more black.' "

      Best rock movie ever.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    2. Re:None more black by bosef1 · · Score: 2

      Why'd you make him black?
      Because I wanted him to be perfect.

    3. Re:None more black by Sporkinum · · Score: 2

      What a thread! Douglas Adams and SpınÌal Tap all in one!

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    4. Re:None more black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, is Carbon Nanotube Coating the new Black?

      How long before this hits the runwyas in Milan?

  6. this is very old news. by wierd_w · · Score: 2, Informative

    Seriously, this was released to the media about 3 years or so ago, and touted as "scientists create blackest material ever".

    Here is a link to a wired magazine article from march 2009:

    http://m.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/ultrablack/

    Must be a slow news week.

    1. Re:this is very old news. by Ugarte · · Score: 1

      wow you're right... someone even made my very dumb joke about 2 years or so ago

    2. Re:this is very old news. by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Just your normal slashdot news cycle. 3 years is a fairly short cycle, because of all the editorial work and verification that they do.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    3. Re:this is very old news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      seriously, try actually reading the article. It clearly states that they have improved the absorption by 10 to 100 times over previous nanotube coatings, and improved the wavelength range by 50 times.

    4. Re:this is very old news. by cpricejones · · Score: 1

      I just heard a seminar from the guy who discovered nanotubes ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumio_Iijima ), and it's pretty amazing with all the various properties the tubes have. He showed us some, and it was black (and he talked about this). He also mentioned that they would be the future for smartphone touch screens but that Apple was reluctant to use them in the latest iPhone.

      Now when his group or some other researchers discover a thin material black enough to block gamma wavelengths, then we'll be talking.

    5. Re:this is very old news. by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      Still it's nice to have some proper "news for nerds" once in a while.

      --
      -- no sig today
    6. Re:this is very old news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The previous work was only done to 2.5 microns wavelength, this goes out to 100 microns and also addresses emissivity at cryogenic temperatures. Big difference.

    7. Re:this is very old news. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No it's not. This absorbs more light. read both articles. There are dupes, and there are people who think the story is a dupe because the don't understand some thing can be improved.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:this is very old news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old article talks about absorbing 97-99% of all light. The new NASA article talks about absorbing 99% across the spectrum.

      Sounds like two different materials.

  7. solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    i wonder if this stuff will find applications in night-vision cloaking (far infrared), or in making more efficient solar cells by absorbing nearly all useful incident light?

    could it be used on CCD arrays to make them more light-sensitive?

    1. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by jamesh · · Score: 1

      i wonder if this stuff will find applications in night-vision cloaking (far infrared)

      Unless this material has some new property, wouldn't it also radiate better than any other material?

    2. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it would be useful for IR cloaking. To conceal your IR signature you want to imitate your surroundings, not stand out as the blackest thing against a relatively moderate background. It's probably on the wrong scale to be useful for radar cloaking too, but you never know.

      Unless the nanotubes are themselves used as collectors, this would be pretty bad when used in a solar cell application as well. In that situation you want reflectance on any surfaces near the solar collector elements.

      Someone above mentioned insulation. It's probably a very expensive but excellent application in that case. Superblack on the outside, reflective on the inside and you'd have a virtual oven.

    3. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by wierd_w · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It *is* possible to create nanotube based semiconductors by carefully introducing latice defects into the tube walls. (Creates a nanotube diode)

      Sorry, paywalled:
      http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.matsci.34.040203.112300

      Combined, the two technologies could be used to fashion an absurdly efficient solar collector. The problem is that not all photons are created equally, and that absorbed spectra might not carry sufficient energy to hop the bandgap. This would only cause the nanotubes to get hot, and reemit the photons only to be captured again by the neighbors.

      Perhaps if total energy absorption is high enough, then multiple photons could be used to hop the gap, (like in red light on chlorophyll) but that would have to be some strange juju.

    4. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Unless this material has some new property, wouldn't it also radiate better than any other material?

      It probably -- but not necessarily -- has high emissivity to match its high absorbency. It almost certainly does not have low emissivity.

      Which means when used in far-infrared astronomical observations, the telescope would still have to be cooled to extremely low temperatures to minimize the emissions from the surface. It would still have the advantage of not reflecting infrared from other sources into the telescope.

      And yeah, it'd be useless for infrared cloaking, where the entire problem is emitted light from your heat. If you could cool yourself off to prevent this, then you wouldn't need this coating.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    5. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by hort_wort · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see a spin off of it that can absorb cosmic rays easily, then we could coat our spacecrafts with it. You know -- when we have them again.... :-\

    6. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      It probably -- but not necessarily -- has high emissivity to match its high absorbency

      * At the frequencies in question.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      For an infrared cloack you need an astounishingly good insulator with some kind of venting, not a heat absorber. For a more efficient solar cell (photovoltaic cell implicit there?) you need a better solar cell, what is completely unrelated to this thing. The same applies to CCD arrays.

      Now, about some other uses. For a good insulator that things isn't usefull at all. If you put it facing an air (or vacuum) gap, you'll make it a poorer insulator, not a better one. For thermal solar electricity generation you need something that is good at absorbing visible light, but bad at absorbing infrared, so, doesn't apply. It could be great for heating things at low temperature environments, but I bet any dark painting will be nearly as much as good, and you can probably get much cheaper paintings with other technologies.

      All said, the summary already enumerated the best uses.

    8. Re:solar panels, CCDs or camouflage? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I doubt it would be useful for IR cloaking. To conceal your IR signature you want to imitate your surroundings, not stand out as the blackest thing against a relatively moderate background.

      Same applies for light and radar too. Don't forget the reason the Lockheed "F-117 boat" concept didn't work is because it showed up on radar as an unnatural void in the radar-noisy ocean.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  8. Cancer be damned! by itsenrique · · Score: 1

    I think I've just found the material I want for the pigment of my next tattoo.

    1. Re:Cancer be damned! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I think I've just found the material I want for the pigment of my next tattoo.

      1400 degrees F, man, if you thought needles were painful....

    2. Re:Cancer be damned! by prometx42 · · Score: 1

      Being, essentially, just carbon, it probably wouldn't be all that carcinogenic. Though I suppose it could have weird effects at the "nano" scale....

  9. let's get Super PC here... by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

    ...it ain't black, it's charcoal grey.
    <g>

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    1. Re:let's get Super PC here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nanotube-american

  10. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...new super black nanotube found to have mysteriously large penis

  11. XKCD by stms · · Score: 1

    This sounds like the perfect material to cover up those pesky stars.

  12. do they think US readers are stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    1,382 degrees ? how exactly did they come up with that number? Here is Google at help:
    1,382F = 750 C

    1. Re:do they think US readers are stupid? by qubezz · · Score: 1

      Even if they can't do significant figures, at least they told us how big they are in International Hair-Thickness Units...

  13. Didn't they.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... used to call that stuff soot?

    1. Re:Didn't they.. by wierd_w · · Score: 2

      While soot contains nanotubes, it also contains other fullerenes, and amorphous carbon microparticles.

      This subsrance, on the other had, is nothing but nanotubes, and in a very densely packed, and orderly configuration.

      Devil in the details and all that.

  14. heat by MetalOne · · Score: 1

    The article states: "The blacker the material, the more heat it radiates away." I always thought that since black materials don't reflect light that they absorb heat. I have always heard that black clothes and black cars are hotter. However, I once read that the Blackbird SR-71 was painted black for the cooling effect. Could someone make sense of this for me?

    1. Re:heat by gstrickler · · Score: 2

      Black is both a better radiator, and a better absorber. As for the SR-71 "Finished aircraft were painted a dark blue, almost black to increase the emission of internal heat (fuel acted as a heat sink for avionics cooling) and to act as camouflage against the night sky." So, it was a combination of things.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    2. Re:heat by timnbron · · Score: 1

      The infra red space telescopes are positioned out of the sun ('behind' the earth) in order to keep cool. However, there's still the heat from the electronics, and there's no way to get rid of that apart from by radiating the heat away. Black radiates well, hence colouring it black will keep the spacecraft cool.

      In sunlight, more heat is coming in than going out, hence black cars get hot, and normal spacecraft are coloured silver (or similar) to make them highly reflective and bounce the heat off. (Even those spacecraft will often have dark surfaces on the other side in order to keep cool.)

      I'm guessing that the Blackbird SR-71 got so hot with the engines, that painting it black would result in far more heat radiated than the sun would put back in. It's all a matter of balancing heat in and heat out.

      The summary is a little wrong: "Because the light absorption level is so high, the super-black material will also keep temperatures down for the instruments it is used on." I think that should be "Because the heat radiation level is so high, the super-black material will also keep temperatures down for the instruments it is used on."

      --
      There are some who call me ... Tim.
    3. Re:heat by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      ISTR reading about the composite skin on newer stealth aircraft; these skins are laminated carbon fibre with surface profiles similar to golf balls, designed to both absorb and scatter RADAR to give the aircraft the RADAR profile of a sparrow or similar. Think also really, really expensive fishing pole or reinforced carbon-carbon yacht hulls (which use the surface characteristics to create an air bubble across the entire surface of the hull during motion to reduce friction between it and the water).

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    4. Re:heat by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that the Blackbird SR-71 got so hot with the engines.

      At Mach 3+, you get significant heating from friction with the passing air (thus, ablative heat shields on re-entry capsules, shuttle insulation tiles, etc.)

      The fun part about the Blackbird was the way it leaked fuel... it's worth doing a little reading about the Blackbird, it's one of the more radical machines ever built, and far more entertaining than refined chimney soot.

  15. Paint it Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I see nanotubes and I want them painted black...

  16. it won't have any reflection as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if don't, i think this material must look surreal, like some sort of "inserted cartoon" in the reality.

  17. Supercain by anarkhos · · Score: 1

    The Republican party is now researching ways to allow candidates to withstand temperatures of 1,382.

    (You might need to be a Daily Show viewer to understand...)

    --
    >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
    >life
  18. Fuligin by jmcharry · · Score: 1

    Being the color of Severian's cloak in Shadow of the Torturer.

  19. Light absorbing = cooler? by NichardRixon · · Score: 1

    If the nanotubes absorb light, wouldn't instruments coated with the material tend to get warmer rather than stay cooler?

    NR

    1. Re:Light absorbing = cooler? by llamapater · · Score: 1

      it's thinner so it allows for faster thermal disipation. less mass to act like an insulator.

    2. Re:Light absorbing = cooler? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had the same thought for about 2 seconds, then i RTFA

      Currently, instrument developers apply black paint to baffles and other components to help prevent stray light from ricocheting off surfaces. However, black paints absorb only 90 percent of the light that strikes it. The effect of multiple bounces makes the coating’s overall advantage even larger, potentially resulting in hundreds of times less stray light.>
      IOW this is applied to shielding, not the actual part they want to keep cool, then they radiate the collected heat away.

  20. Hotblack Desioto's limo can't be far behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put your analyst on danger money baby, now.

  21. Even older than that by artor3 · · Score: 1

    It was first developed, to the best of my knowledge, jointly by researchers at RPI and Rice in Jan 2008. Here's their presentation and here's a link showing the date.

    In fact, their material is ten times darker than the one apparently developed by NASA, with a reflectivity of 0.05% compared to NASA's 0.5%.

    1. Re:Even older than that by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      Great article, thanks for sharing.
      BTW, correction: the article states 0.045% no .05% you were 10% off!

      --
      -- no sig today
    2. Re:Even older than that by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Great article, thanks for sharing.
      BTW, correction: the article states 0.045% no .05% you were 10% off!

      Depends on what you care about, if it's a reflection stopper in a telescope tube, then, yes, 10%. If it's something normal humans use like a solar energy collector, then it's 0.005%, or about the same effect as a single bird dropping on a 1000 sq ft collector surface.

  22. So.. it's Blacker than Black? by koreys · · Score: 1

    "There is none Blacker"

    1. Re:So.. it's Blacker than Black? by fragMasterFlash · · Score: 1

      Does it go to eleven?

  23. Oblig Spinal Tap Quote by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2

    "It's like, how much more black could it be? And the answer is none, none more black."

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    1. Re:Oblig Spinal Tap Quote by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1
      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  24. Space my ass... by Jozza+The+Wick · · Score: 1

    They're gonna paint the new Stealth Fighter with it. Or, they already have a 99.999% version ready to go for the B-3 Opportunity...

    1. Re:Space my ass... by TheCRAIGGERS · · Score: 1

      You seem to be under the impression that this material can only be used for one thing at a time.

      Thankfully, NASA doesn't have to wait until the military is finished using it.

  25. This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Guy who modded this -1 is just jealous hes not black

  26. Full-scale pics! by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

    I'm more interested in seeing what the material looks like at a standard scale, preferably in a well-lit room and in motion. It reminds me (as its predecessor did a few years back) of the fuligin cloaks worn by torturers in the Book of the New Sun. One property of those was that due to the high absorption of light, they looked less like a thing of substance and more like a void or a deep shadow. I can imagine that you'd lose all shape information save for the outline of the material and whatever it is covering.

  27. "Paging Mr Desiato, your limo is ready..." by Guppy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Zaphod's attention however was elsewhere. His attention was riveted on the ship standing next to Hotblack Desiato's limo. His mouths hung open.

    "That," he said, "that ... is really bad for the eyes ..."

    Ford looked. He too stood astonished.
    It was a ship of classic, simple design, like a flattened salmon, twenty yards long, very clean, very sleek. There was just one remarkable thing about it.

    "It's so ... black!" said Ford Prefect, "you can hardly make out its shape ... light just seems to fall into it!"

    Zaphod said nothing. He had simply fallen in love.
    The blackness of it was so extreme that it was almost impossible to tell how close you were standing to it.

    "Your eyes just slide off it ..." said Ford in wonder. It was an emotional moment. He bit his lip.

    1. Re:"Paging Mr Desiato, your limo is ready..." by stenn · · Score: 0

      up mod +42

  28. Previous material was 100% reflective? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, it absorbs 99% and is the most absorbent material yet, 100 times more absorbant than the previous. Lets consider that;

    The new material reflects 1% and the previous runner up, being 100 times more reflective, reflected 100%?

    1. Re:Previous material was 100% reflective? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      I hope your trolling and not actually this stupid.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
  29. "is about 10,000 times thinner than a human hair" by terjeber · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that it has a huge negative "thinness"? Sigh.

  30. Donations by kramulous · · Score: 1

    If the American government is not going to fund NASA (properly), can they at least put up a paypal account/donation thingy or something?

    >$US600Billion for military
    $US20Billion for NASA

    Sorry, but as a foreigner I'm happy to throw a couple of regular bucks for a good cause.

    --
    .
  31. A perfect material for... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

    ... solar collectors. One could make a hell of a hot water heater from a base that absorbed 99% of the (visible part of the) spectrum. One could make a fairly impressive collector for the generation of electricity as well. Imagine a 1 km^2 south-facing hillside covered with flat black panels under a transparent insulated airtight roof, leading up to a hilltop tower filled with turbines (top of tower some km or so above the air intake at the base of the hill). 700 megawatts (or so) peak absorption, even allowing for inefficiencies should allow for 100-200 MW peak electrical production. Ten such hills/towers is a GW of production that works best at just the time of day that demand for electricity peaks in hot climates. And running the collector up a hillside is such an obvious improvement over e.g. the Australian model of a solar updraft tower poking straight up out of a plain covered with the collector. Why engineer a kilometer plus high tower straight up in the middle of a flat when nature provides you with all or most of that kilometer for free, at the top of a slope conveniently tipped to optimize the reception of solar flux? Not to mention the fact that many such hillsides are "wasted space" as far as utility is concerned, good for nothing but a view and located where nobody can even appreciate the view.

    Sadly, all that they will do with this new material, I'm sure, is use it to build better stealth aircraft or the like. I'm surprised it isn't classified.

    rgb

    --
    Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    1. Re:A perfect material for... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Those greenhouse turbine thingies have been proposed since the 1970's, ultra-black wouldn't really improve them enough (compared to cheap 90% black paint) to make it worth using. Aren't they building a couple of prototypes in Australia and Spain?

      I'm sure this material will make it into projects like space telescopes, and probably the high mountain observatories too. There are just so few applications that really care about that last fraction of a percent of reflectivity.

    2. Re:A perfect material for... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Yes (to Australia and Spain -- in Spain a small prototype has already been built -- I think it is 50 kW or thereabouts -- Spain is a GW IIRC. They've been proposed for the US southwest too, but not yet successfully. Building on a hillside would halve the cost and potentially double the yield.

      As far as improving the efficiency -- 9% of 100 MW is 90 MW. 90 MW times (say) 2000 hours in a year is 180 GW-hours. A KW-hour is worth (say) a dime. Dividing by 10^4 to obtain dollars, using 99% instead of 90% (all things being equal) is worth 18 million dollars a year, for a mythical 1 km^2 collector. Given 1 million square meters to cover, if the marginal cost of using 99% vs 90% coating is less than (say) $100, it is break even to win a bit on the amortized cost of the investment.

      So I'm not certain you're correct about it not being worth using. 10% higher yield over a very long time is a lot of money, and honestly, it might be worth it at a longer amortization than 5 or 6 years (assumed). Even at $200/m^2 it might be worth it if the plant could last for 20 years (that's $360 million dollars higher pure marginal return over that time frame).

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    3. Re:A perfect material for... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      In my math, 9% of 100 is 9.

    4. Re:A perfect material for... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " 9% of 100 MW is 90 MW"

      You might want to read that out loud.
      If it still seems correct, please take a math class.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:A perfect material for... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, well, hmmm divide all answers by ten, hmm -- look, over there! Are those ponies?

      (Ducks and runs away...)

      Although I suck at arithmetic, the point is still the same. There is a point where the marginal return of the coating makes it a break-even proposition, and it isn't so low as to be completely unreasonable at $10-20 per m^2 -- a large-scale production facility serving a world market devoted to producing rooftop solar house/water heaters/coolers (e.g. buffered by underground water-coupled geothermal reservoirs) and panels for solar updraft facilities could create a window of marginal profit there. Also, there may be some further added value to using the coating that would increase its marginal advantage in ways other than just the difference in absorption/reradiation efficiency. For example, "just" a cheap coat of black paint or tar on concrete might not have the ability to withstand the thermal temperature swings associated with heating at 700 W/m^2 during the day to a high temperature followed by radiative cooling at night to a relatively low temperature across a range of humidities with a powerful updraft wind pulling across it eight or nine hours a day. Many coatings might well dry, crack, peel, or melt and be sticky enough that they gradually coat with enough dust to degrade performance another 10%. Even these "cheap" coats aren't free, especially if they require running maintenance or mid-cycle replacement -- one might well end up comparing the cost of a baked-on ceramic paint on panels to the cost of this similarly factory produced panel.

      None of which is a proof, of course -- it is simply pointing out that I'm still not certain that you are correct. At this point the cost of producing the coating is undoubtedly prohibitive, and there is a very high end market that justifies a high price. That doesn't necessarily mean that the coating is so intrinsically expensive to produce in a production facility that is engineered to provide economy of scale sufficient to supply millions of panels and pipes and to fulfill other possible niche markets for the stuff that it could never make economic sense to use it instead of "just" black paint.

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    6. Re:A perfect material for... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I'm not certain I'm correct, either. But... nifty as the greenhouse turbines are, I think non-reflectivity hits a point of diminishing returns for them, maybe at 90-95% if the cost of the paint increases by 2x, maybe somewhere else. I _almost_ put reflective paint inside my attic, but opted for the traditional additional 6" of fiberglass instead, cost about the same, and I'm pretty sure the fiberglass serves me better, inside the house at least.

      To me, the greenhouse would best be served by improved insulation and back-reflection in the transparent layer, that would be a very interesting problem due to variables like bio-fouling of the top layer, aging of the transparent materials in the sun, etc. Does a double layer of transparent material pay off? If so, do you immobilize the air in it, or make it another convection layer? If it's a convection layer, maybe a third or fourth layer would help? Maybe only in the hotter regions? etc. etc. Neat project, lots of questions.

      Super-super-super-non-reflective sounds to me like mostly optical applications inside lens barrels, and maybe a good thing to coat Peltier cooling junctions with - especially since the coating is so thin and thus non-insulating.

    7. Re:A perfect material for... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      No real arguments. The right place to resolve these questions is in mid-scale prototypes where you can measure and quantify and the cost/benefit of alternatives. I've got a really good location for one. Now if I just had a few million dollars...:-)

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    8. Re:A perfect material for... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Site locations seem to be one of the major challenges for the greenhouse turbines... anywhere close enough to population, or even transmission lines, to get enough land with an ideal hill, will tend to be relatively expensive compared to being out in the middle of the desert where nobody needs the electricity. I can imagine a few places in Australia, or perhaps the American Southwest, that might be feasible.

    9. Re:A perfect material for... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      I think it is a lot easier than that to find good locations. There are mountains all up and down the Appalachians that are pretty much nothing but trees on a slope. The Rockies, the Sangre de Christos, the Sierras. Easily hundreds of thousands of square kilometers of more or less fallow, south facing slope with order of a kilometer of vertical rise. The main difficulty is just picking >>a
      The idea is old enough (1926 according to wikipedia, although I had it independently) -- there are several prototype projects (including a 200 MW facility in China) of the tall chimney variety, but AFAIK no hillside prototypes out there.

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
  32. stealth by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    If this works right, it might absorb radar and other emissions. If so, then this would be a good coat for military aircraft.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  33. Car Paint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to paint my car... police speed radars will never get me again!

  34. The attempt to do things right started under Bush by Quila · · Score: 1

    The program under which Solyndra got funding had its merits. Solyndra's initial application was even handled under Bush, according to the law.

    The way the Obama administration handled it after that was the scandal.

  35. Re:"is about 10,000 times thinner than a human hai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean that it has a huge negative "thinness"? Sigh.

    Of course not. Thinness is inverse thickness, not negative thickness.

  36. potential as a radiator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it absorbs across the spectrum, it would also radiate across the spectrum. This should be a major boon for radiant cooling applications.

  37. Military applications by PPH · · Score: 1

    This just means that those 'black projects' the Pentagon is so fond of funding will be even blacker.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  38. Re:The attempt to do things right started under Bu by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Ah, yes the under the table deal with bush was fine, but when it came to roost under Obama, it's his fault? typical
    Also Obama's fault, Jobless, the economy and 9/11.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  39. Re:The attempt to do things right started under Bu by Quila · · Score: 1

    I thought Obama was supposed to be better: transparent, honest. At least that's how the package was sold.

    Under Bush, the process for approval began according to the law. However, by the end of his riegn Energy and OMB had serious questions about Solyndra's application. Then Obama took over, backed by Solyndra investors, and approval was rushed through despite the lack of required due diligence. And then it got worse.

    And three years into Obama's rule, when exactly does anything become his fault? At what point does he not get to blame Bush for everything he does wrong?