Slashdot Mirror
Carbyne: a Form of Carbon Even Stronger Than Graphene
New submitter Dialecticus writes "Sebastian Anthony at ExtremeTech has written an article about research into the physical properties of carbyne, an elusive form of carbon. A new mathematical analysis by Mingjie Liu and others at Rice University suggests that carbyne may achieve double the strength of graphene, stealing its crown and becoming the strongest material known to man. 'While carbyne cannot be stretched, it can be bent into an arc or circle — and by doing so, the additional strain between the carbon atoms alters the electrical bandgap. This property could lead to some interesting uses in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS). By adding different molecules to the end of a carbyne chain, such as a methylene (CH2) group, carbyne can also be twisted — much like a strand of DNA — again adding strain and modifying the electrical bandgap. By "decorating" carbyne chains with different molecules, other properties can be added, too: Tack some calcium atoms on the end, which like to mop up spare hydrogen molecules, and suddenly you have a high-density, reversible hydrogen storage sponge.
It’s also important to note that, just like graphene, carbyne is just one atom thick. This means that, for a given mass of carbyne, its surface area is relatively massive. A single gram of graphene, for example, has a surface area of about five tennis courts. This could be very important in areas such as energy storage (batteries, supercapacitors), where the surface area of the electrode is directly proportional to the energy density of the device.'"
Been hearing so many wonderful things about exotic forms of carbon but when do I get something I can buy ( at a reasonable price )?
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
...will go to whichever material can be put to practical use outside of the research lab.
Transparent Aluminum, I'm still waiting....
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...How much is that in Volkswagens per story?
Gun nuts can be scientists too. Or scientists are so myopic that they didn't know that was already a word. Could go either way, but it's cool to see new things like this still being discovered.
Is it space elevator time yet?
Perhaps not.
However, there does appear to be at least one fly in the ointment - material stability. It seems that if you have more than one strand of Carbyne that contacts another one, cross-links will form and will degrade the material’s strength. Money quote from the article; “This barrier suggests the viability of carbyne in condensed phase at room temperature on the order of days”
We're still on simulated space elevators.
What I gather from the article is that it has impact strength but not much in the way of tensile strength. It appears to have a few other interesting properties though.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
Because it's an alkyne of pure carbon. At least, the single/triple alternating version is.
The double/double form could be named carbene except that that name is already taken. Then again, that didn't seem to stop them here either. The better name for this material is linear acetylenic carbon. Sadly, I don't remember enough organic chemistry to know what the double/double would be called.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Sorry, here's that article on cumulenes.
(Stupid Slashdot posting delay... *grumble grumble*)
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
It doesn't steal the crown... ...until we can freeze Han Solo in it.
I'm holding out for carbonite.
The -yne ending is already in common use for carbon compounds with a triple bond. For example, ethyne (the IUPAC systematic name for acetylene). It's not a very good name in this case though- "carbyne" already refers to a type of reactive species of carbon with three unpaired electrons, in analogy to the more common "carbene" which has two unpaired electrons. Wikipedia suggests a better name for the carbon chain to be "linear acetylenic carbon," though I'll admit it doesn't roll off the tongue. Shorter versions of this molecular chain, which terminate with a hydrogen on each end are generally called polyacetylenes or polyynes.
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
From the non-chemistry side of the etymology, it is apparently not known with certainty why a short rifle is called a carbine in the first place:
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
But... how about that flying car?
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
An straight-up Space Elevator is still way beyond us, even if we could pump out molecularly perfect nanotubes of indefinite length. But smaller tether systems are totally possible; 'stationary' and hypersonic Bolos and Skyhooks, depending on the orbital velocity and tip velocity (itself depending on tether length and rotation rate). You don't need a massive anchor site, you could fly some of the smaller ones in a single launch, and we could make some of the smaller ones with materials we already manufacture in bulk (e.g. Spectra and other tensile Aramids).
Then there are just fun things you can do, like conductive tether generators and propulsion inside a magnetosphere, or linear tether launchers.
But you're not describing a structure that stretches; you're describing one that telescopes. Not the same thing.
And while a space elevator won't be fixed at both ends the way a bridge is, it's still going to be subject to outside forces acting on it (high-speed winds in the upper atmospheres, for example). If the bridge parallel bothers you, consider a skyscraper instead - and skyscrapers also need to be elastic enough to sway a little bit.
Perhaps a little more emphasis should be given to the fact that the compound in question has never been synthesized, despite decades of effort. And that one strand would combine explosively with a second, if two such strands could be made.
> A bridge is fixed at both ends.
Wrong. Learn2bridges.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Normally, one could measure the inner surface and the outer and compare. You could use any unit of measurement you wanted, such as "atom lengths". For example, you could say that the inner surface is a million atoms long and the outer surface is a 1.03 million.
This stuff is one atom thick. In this case, the atoms that make up the inner surface are SAME ATOMS as the outer surface. The inside and the outside are the same side! So of course they are the same length, since they are the same atoms.
In t
In a single-atom thick layer, which 'side' stretches?
There's your answer. Back to school with ye.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
I highly doubt we'll ever be able to make strands of this stuff several thousands of km long, so shorter strands will have to be combined. The epoxy or whatever is used to hold them together will undoubtedly have some stretch.
Also, carbon bonds may not be particularly stretchy, but over that kind of length even a tiny amount will add up to a decent distance. If that's not enough, use the helical form.
Atoms have thickness, but bonds are essentially one dimensional.
Methylene! If they can get their hands on it that is I guess they will probably be stuck a 30 gallon drum or stopping a train, killing anyone who happens by Sorry I just couldn't resist #breakingbad
411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
So sandwich or encase the Carbyne molecules, am I missing something here?
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
Instability in organic molecules does not neccessarily mean that it reacts with gasses in the air (namely oxygen).
It usually means that there's a more stable form it will inevitably convert to. There are countless conversion reactions in organic molecules - exposure to heat, air or light usually only fastens the process. Preventing exposure to these factors does not stop the degradation, however.
Take batteries as an example. LiIon batteries will degrade regardless of outside factors - and those are pretty much isolated systems. It's only the speed of the degradation you can influence. But rule was, whatever you do, after about three years you'd take a massive hit to the capacity of LiIon batteries.
You got to think 2 dimensionally! Think of having a bunch of sphere magnets, you clip them into a 1 magnet high sheet. Now you can bend the sheet of magnets without stretching them they just roll on each other. You pole is more 3 dimension so you have rows and rows of these things so the upper part will stretch assuming that its bonds are equal on all dimensions.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
As a mechanical engineer, I have only ever needed integral calculus outside of school work (including tutoring) three times:
1. With a friend, for fun, to win a bet. Yay, free beer!
2. To answer a particular question for work. Yay, happy boss!
3. Just now, for fun, to determine the required material stiffness for a cable hanging down from geostationary orbit (i.e. a space elevator cable) to support its own weight. Yay, Science!
Calculated minimum required material stiffness for space elevator cable: 4.9x10^7 N*m/kg.
This jives with what the 10x10^7 N*m/kg quoted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator (referencing: Edwards, Bradley Carl. The NIAC Space Elevator Program. NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts). This would make perfect sense that he is assuming a safety factor of 2 (safety margin of 100%)
So, assuming that the nano-scale cross-linking issues mentioned previously in this thread do not reduce the tensile strength too much, and assuming we're okay with a safety factor of only 1.5 (50% safety margin), then we're finally in the ballpark with Carbyne having a material stiffness of about 7.5x10^7 N*m/kg.
We have the material; we can build it. So now, it's no longer a question of can the physics work, but rather a question of the political and business will to put in the engineering work to make this a reality.
Very, very cool.
Acetylene features the single & triple carbon bonds. It burns so hot because these bonds are inherently unstable. So how is it that this new substance, with these more-unstable-than-normal-carbon bonds, supposedly *stronger*?
I come here for the love