Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Camera Flashes Kill Nanotubes 211

Posted by Hemos from the smile-pretty-mr.-carbon-KA-WHAM dept.
Fnordmonger writes "New Scientist is running a story claiming that flash photography can cause nanotubes to explode. Basically , the carbon absorbs heat, which cannot be dissipated. Instead, the energy is released in an explosion. There is a cool video there of the stuff going off."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Camera Flashes Kill Nanotubes More

Camera Flashes Kill Nanotubes

Comments Filter:

  • Space Elevator? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Matey-O ( 518004 ) <michaeljohnmiller@mSPAMsSPAMnSPAM.com> on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:14AM (#3416076) Homepage Journal
    So we've build this elevator to space....but nobody can take a picture of it. :P
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • ...that Disney is destined to rule the stars.

      I mean, look at their progression: Disney Land, Disney World...

      It's pretty clear where they're headed.

      "Please keep all parts of your body inside the vehicle at all times, for your own safety from moving parts and hard vacuum. No flash photography is permitted."
      • That'll be one for the tech support helpline :

        [ring..ring]
        Hello? How can I help you?
        Oh - well it was my birthday and I'd been bought a computer. My friend took a photo and well - the thing blew up! What shall I do?
        Well - I'll just check my troubleshooting script - no - no mention of what to do if it explodes here.
        Which version of Windows were you running? ...

    • Re:Space Elevator? (Score:3, Informative)

      by JWhitlock ( 201845 )
      Well, if you'd read the article, you'd know that it only affects nanotubes with a single atom thickness.

      I agree, if the space elevator is only 1 atom thick, I'm not riding!

      • give this kid a reward! (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Banner ( 17158 )
        Buy trying to take the picture in the lab, this kid found out something more important then all the researchers developing this. And may have saved us from some nasty things.
        Can you imagine if this was found out -after- this stuff was rolled out into general use?
      • "You must be THIS thin to ride this ride..."
    • I find it rather comforting to see that everyone immediately thinks of the implications for the space elevator, first thing (including me).
      I'd guess that direct sunlight across vacuum would be bright enough to do it, too. It'll have to have a really failsafe reflective coating.
    • One scary thought; builders of bridges, buildings, or whatever could incorporate these, and then have any easy way of commiting terrorist acts in the future. One more happy thought to keep in mind.
  • how am i supposed to serve MP3s off of my nano-computer with all those strobe lights going all the time?

    dammit!

    Ohhh...

    upon actually reading the article(something i sometimes do before i post...) i see that they are considering taking advantage of this for the construction of uber-cool nono-circuits....

    so maybe my strobe lights can be PART of my MP3 disco computer... cool. it's a great time to be alive!

  • About Other Nanotech Applications? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Can it destroy nanorobots that the government put in my body against my will?

  • new ignition source? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:17AM (#3416092) Homepage
    This could be a cool way to make a simple sealed emergency fire starting device for survival equipment companies...

    Think about it.. get a pile of wood and twigs, set device in middle press button, get away..

    Oh wait... a bic lighter might be a better idea...

    nevermind

  • Building Materials (Score:3, Funny)

    by yintercept ( 517362 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:20AM (#3416120) Homepage Journal
    Researchers around the world are exploring the potential that carbon nanotubes could have for a wide range of super-strong materials and nanoscale circuits.

    I can see the highway dept completing their fancy new bridge across the Tacoma Narrows with super strong carbon nanotubes. A week after opening, Priscilla wants a picture of her two darling munchkins standing with the beautiful black bridge. She snaps a photo...and BAM!!! the whole thing goes up in smoke.
    • I'm reminded of Super Metroid, when your in Maridia and you set a super grenade to explode in the right tube.
      *MEerrrroooeeaaaaaaaaaaa*
      *samus gets up*
      *looks left*
      *looks right*
      *looks up*
      *creek... creeeek.. creek creek creek creek SMASHHHHHH*
      *glass dangles all around and the tube's destroyed*

    • Circa 2030 (Score:5, Funny)

      by Kibo ( 256105 ) <naw#gmail.com> on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:39AM (#3416249) Homepage
      AMD's C4 Featuring a new nanotube superconducting core.

      Extream case mods have graduated from hobby to a high risk sport lauded in Mountain Dew commercials.
    • Whereupon the BLFN (Bin Laden Forever Network) claims responsibility for the damage.


      Meanwhile, the FBI arrests Pricilla and her two kids for terrorism. Priscilla refuses to talk citing her right to access to her lawyer. The FBI meanwhile has questioned her two kids and both of them - the brats - say that "they are just one of the tourists".

  • Not as bad as it sounds (Score:5, Funny)

    by Athyra ( 163158 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:24AM (#3416156)
    This is a more positive development than the headline implies. First, since double-layer nanotubes won't break, they now know how to keep them working if needed, and second, this now allows them to have a trigger action to set things in motion during complex sequences.

    Personally, I'd like to see Milton Bradley take advantage of this and update Mousetrap. Turning the crank woud now release the ball, causing the little man to land on the flash button, breaking the nanotube and releasing the mousetrap. Of course, setup would just suck. :-)

  • Fusion? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If the tubes are loaded with deuterium & tritium, of He-3, could this be useful for small scale fusion?
  • Wait a minute... I thought the carbon nanotube dissipated REALLY well. Wasn't there an article here on Slashdot [slashdot.org] about them being superconductors? Don't superconductors move heat really easily? I didn't read the article, but this struck me as odd. Does the article explain this?

    Besides, I thought carbon nanotubes were supposed to be even greater than sliced bread, concidering these:
    They work as semiconductors [slashdot.org]
    They can make a molecular computer [slashdot.org]
    They can kill friction [slashdot.org]
    and on and on and on.
    • You're correct. One of the amazing properties of nanotubes is their thermal conductivity. I'm guessing that somehow a sudden intense flash of light overwhelms the tubes somehow. Can anyone elaborate on this issue?
      • Yes, the article in question elaborates on the issue. Specifically, only single walled tubes that are bunched together catch fire. Multiple walled tubes do not.

      • Re:Can't dissipate heat? (Score:5, Informative)

        by MarkusQ ( 450076 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:45AM (#3416295) Journal
        If you heat an issolated something uniformly it doesn't matter how well it conducts heat; heat only flows if there's a gradient (in this case, that implies someplace else (that wasn't flashed) to dump the heat).

        -- MarkusQ

        • If the nanotubes are capable of picking up that much heat from a flash, it would seem they have a good possibility at being used in a high yield solar furnace or other light to heat exchange material. Just include the medium on to which the heat should be transferred in the system and it shouldn't explode/break down/fold...just create and pass along heat.

          It would also be environmentally friendly...mostly carbon

  • Obligatory Simpsons (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:28AM (#3416178)
    This isn't news. Bart found this out when he visited Itchy and Scratchy Land and fought robots powered by nanotubes
  • This is significant because most photochemical reactions have poor quantum yield. This may lead to some highly efficient solar cells, photo catylists or sensors.

  • Nanotubes (Score:3, Funny)

    by cigarky ( 89075 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:29AM (#3416193)
    Thank God, the next time Wil Wheaton makes another nano-lifeform there will be a way to defeat it ;)
  • Overheard as a press photographer prepares to shoot the new, carbon-fiber bridge:

    "This'll make a great blow-up!"

  • Bad news... (Score:3, Funny)

    by tps12 ( 105590 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:32AM (#3416206) Homepage Journal
    ...for the nanomodelling industry.
  • I guess this is how The Simpsons killed all those robots in the amusement park.

  • Dexters Labratory (Score:4, Funny)

    by Odinson ( 4523 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:33AM (#3416221) Homepage Journal
    "Dee Dee, what did I tell you about comming in here?"

    "Look Dexter, I got a new camera, isn't it cooooool??"

    *-FLASH-*

    "Dee Dee, You are a geeeniuuuuss!"

  • There is a cool video there of the [Nanotube explosion] going off.

    And with those words, you killed the site.

  • Read the article, thanks! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by manual_overide ( 134872 ) <slashdot@duder.net> on Friday April 26, 2002 @10:42AM (#3416269) Homepage Journal
    Firstly, only the single sided tubes exhibit this behavior. So building things out of multiple sided tubes is still viable. Next, they absorb the light of the flash because they are black, but can't dissipate the heat out fast enough when there are a number of them bunched together because the heat from one nanotube gets absorbed by another, and so on. Think of it like dissipation interference.

    • Re:Read the article, thanks! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by caesar-auf-nihil ( 513828 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @11:44AM (#3416652)
      After reading the article, there is still a lot of questions regarding the mechanism of nanotube degradation.

      One question that comes to mind is the wavelength of the light produced by the flash. Some materials are stable to some wavelengths, but fall apart under others. The wavelength of that light may have been just right to exite the electrons in the bonds of the nanotube and cause them to break.

      I think we need to look at the structure of the nanotube itself. The single-wall nanotubes have a huge amount of bond strain, and therefore, are somewhat unstable already. What lends support to the heat dissipation arguement is the structure similiarity between the carbon nanotubes (high strain) and graphite (low-strain). Graphite and carbon nanotubes both conduct electricity well, but both are thermal insulators. Graphite however, has no bond strain or instablity, and glows upon heating (releasing the excess energy as light). What I think happens with the single wall nanotubes is not just heat dissipation.

      Since the nanotubes have a lot of bond strain due to their structure, they have a lot of energy built into the structure. However, those strained bonds can be easily broken by putting in enough energy to break them. Once the bonds break, they release bond strain, and therefore, the energy built into the structure. So, its not just heat dissipation, I think what we're seeing here is that intense light is powerful enough to break the bonds in the carbon nanotube, and once that happens, the bond strain energy is released catastrophically, thus causing the explosion/ignition. So each nanotube explodes at the same time, not one leading to another.

      All that being said, this may be the first example of a light-detonated organic chemical degradation. Most are heat generate or shock generated (kinetic energy). Light is almost unheard of. Very interesting result.
      • So, its not just heat dissipation, I think what we're seeing here is that intense light is powerful enough to break the bonds in the carbon nanotube, and once that happens, the bond strain energy is released catastrophically, thus causing the explosion/ignition. So each nanotube explodes at the same time, not one leading to another.

        er, um, no. It's a simple burn, not an explosion. The 'pop' sound is apparently from air inside the tubes being indirectly heated by the tubes when the tubes absorb the heat. The combustion of the tubes, however, is relatively slow and progressive in nature. The rest of your explanation, however, seems to make sense.

        My off-the-cuff thought is that - besides the shape-strain, the combustion may have something to do with the heating of the oxygen inside the tubes. If the tubes amplify the captured energy on the inside, the super-heated tube guts may be where the combustion actually begins. This would also explain why only singld-walled tubes exhibit this behaviour: the second wall would act as an insulating layer for the oxygen inside the tube.

        • I don't remember the article saying that there was a slow burn of the material - more of a rapid ignition and pop. There may have been a slow combustion as you describe, but the rapid ignition, and forceful release of the air in the flask described sounds more like an explosion rather than slow combustion. I'd have to observe the phenomena myself to determine if its a classical "explosion" or simply carbon "burning".

          As for oxygen in the carbon nanotube interior - there is no oxygen in the interior, as these were described as closed (capped) carbon nanotubes, which are formed under inert (non-oxygen) atmospheres. Almost all nanotubes to date have been "empty", in that no other molecules are present in them after formation. As with all things in chemistry, there are exceptions, but I'm quite sure that these materials were empty. Therefore, oxygen would have been involved in the oxidative degradation (burning) on the outside of the tubes, not the inside. Even if they were filled, the amount of anything inside the tube would have been picoliters (1.0x10-12) of material, not enough to force an audible "pop". The diameter of a carbon nanotube is quite small (50 nm I think, depending on the carbon nanotube geometry).

          Your comment makes me wonder if the materials would have rapidly decomposed if kept under nitrogen or argon, rather than air, in the flask.

          I guess I'll just have to wait until the full article comes out to get more answers to my questions.

          • As for oxygen in the carbon nanotube interior - there is no oxygen in the interior, as these were described as closed (capped) carbon nanotubes, which are formed under inert (non-oxygen) atmospheres.

            This is what the article said: (emphasis mine)

            The initial popping noise is generated by the heating of the oxygen inside and between the tubes, which causes a shock wave.

            Then after that it says:

            When the researchers tried the experiment in the absence of oxygen they found that the tubes were transformed into different nanoscopic shapes, some reminiscent of cone-shaped "nanohorns".

            • Thanks for pointing that out. Hmmm...I think the researchers are incorrect in saying that there is oxygen inside the tubes, its really too small a cavity to hold enough oxygen to be meaningful in this reaction. Outside the tubes however...well..there may be other things going on.

              However, I missed the part about them trying it in the absence of oxygen. The change of the shape suggests that my idea about bond strain is not so far off. Since oxygen isn't present when the bonds break, the tubes cannot combust/explode. Instead the bonds break and rearrange to move to structures with less bond strain. Still very interesting results either way.
          • The article claims that the popping sound is the oxygen being forced out of the tubes. To quote: "The initial popping noise is generated by the heating of the oxygen inside and between the tubes, which causes a shock wave.

            As to knowing that it's a slow burn: I watched the video [rpi.edu] (my new version of mplayer [slashdot.org] works quite nicely, thank you).

            Given the longer description in the body of the article, I'm not sure where the 'explosion' tag comes from (other than journalistic hyperbole).

    • Right, so you just have to paint each nontube white...

      Actually, it probably just gives another reason you'd want to coat nanotube bundles with something when you're going to use them. Of course, it's always been known that it's important to coat them with something, because they're flamable, being pure carbon.
  • "...and we present to you: the Beanstalk!" *Flash*pop*flash*pop*crack*boom*CRASH! ... ... YOU MANIACS, YOU BLEW IT UP! YOU BLEW IT ALL UP!"
  • To attach small pads with nanotubes in museums where photos with flash is prohibited...
  • Boy, they could have really used this on the Enterprise when Wesley stupidly let his Nanites get loose in the Evolution [startrek.com] Episode.
  • Everyone's talking about space elevators with the nano tube technology, but, I thought they were supposed to use Bucky Tubes.

    Maybe they're the same thing =\

  • Web sites are like single-layer nanotubes.

    Whenever the /. editors feel like DDOSing a website they just flash a link to it on the front page. :-P

    Way to go guys. You just blew up New Scientist.

  • Nano warfare (Score:2, Funny)

    by lute3 ( 72400 )
    If this becomes the standard behavior for nano machines, then we might not need to build nanos for the purpose of destroying other nanos.. We can just put flash bulbs (conglomeration of LEDs might be even better) near all building entrances and perform a security sweep every X number of hours/days to flush nanos out that might have crept in.. Heck, it might become standard to flash lights all the time. That would be frickin annoying!

    Also, humans might need frequent "decontamination" by flashing lights (LEDs have been used for therapeutic benefit in today's technology--one example [lightforcetherapy.com]) into the body and then re-introducing the "good" nanos through a pill.

    Diamond Age Summary [filmdiva.com]
    Diamond Age Review and audio sample [salon.com]

  • Mirror (Score:3, Informative)

    by ttyp0 ( 33384 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @11:07AM (#3416429) Homepage
    http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 92219 [gtlogistics.com]

    I'm working on getting the MPEG mirrored too.

  • forgetting... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Caineach ( 551452 )
    what you all seem to be forgetting about the article is that is says only single walled nanotubes that are bunched up together will explode. if you take a picture of nanotubes on their own, they wont. so you still can use singlewalled nanotubes in stuff, just not when they're buched up
  • That would mean that native americans had invented nanotubes ?
  • ...when aliens kidnapped then-presidential candidates Bill Clinton and Bob Dole and stored them in a cylindrical glass casing.

    "What the hell is this... some kind of nanotube?"

  • This is a good reason why some people should not be allowed in porn films...

  • photovoltaic? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sammy baby ( 14909 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @11:40AM (#3416616) Journal
    Here's a thought: if the nanotubes are so efficient at absorbing light, is there a way to build them such that the heat could be effeciently drawn out of them in order to provide power for a turbine?

    Or, in English, could you use these things to make ultra-powerful solar panels?

    • Re:photovoltaic? (Score:4, Informative)

      by bugg ( 65930 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @03:39PM (#3418415) Homepage
      For the sake of being correct, this is nowhere near how photovoltaic cells work. It is based on the photoelectric effect, which states that when an electron of an atom is bombarded with a photon of a certain energy (equal to the atom's work function) the electron becomes free. In solar cells, this same thing happens with two dissimilar semiconducting materials to easily create a usable voltage.

      What's happening here is the energy absorbed by the nanotubes cannot dissipate fast enough and cause an explosion. In a photoelectric/photovoltaic system all heat is definitely wasted. So your answer is no, because carbon is not particularly useful in a photovoltaic cell and carbon nanotubes certainly wouldn't be, because their internal resistance is *way* too high.

  • First, there was Fire. Later on came gunpowder. Later than that came C4, Gelignite, and all the other Things That Make You Go Boom.

    Now we've got exploding nanotubes. I suppose the next big thing will be BuckyBombs.

    You may now groan, throw rotten veggies, etc.

  • Hmmm...cool I guess...though to me it looks more like someone missed the toilet.

    alt.binaries.fetish.scat.nanotubes?

  • No photos, please! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @12:17PM (#3416919) Journal
    I can see it now...

    "Welcome to the Daytona Airshow! The newest, most advanced fighter in the world, with the first carbon nanotube body!"

    "Wooo! Quick, take a photo!"

    *FLASH*
    *FIZZLE*
    *CRASH*

    "Oh shit..."

  • No more funny business (Score:4, Funny)

    by brer_rabbit ( 195413 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @12:48PM (#3417162) Journal
    Hey mods: don't you think this article has enough comments marked *funny*? The signal to noise ratio -- even for slashdot -- is in the crapper. Maybe consider not modding stuff down that really isn't funny or better yet find something with real content to mod up.

  • I wonder if the energy release is enough for single-sided nanotubes to be used as explosives. If for nothing else, this is definitely a nifty device for a way to ignite a fuse or something.

    --Speed 3: Gone in a Flash--
    Everybody stay calm! There's a bomb on the camera. If the little flash button is held for more than 3 seconds, the bomb is armed. If you take a picture....the bomb will detonate.

    I could also see this (if nanotubed were cheap to come by) as being a good thing for campers. Need to start a fire? Get some kindling, logs, your nanotubes and a flashbulb and you're ready to go!

    Another really neat thing I'd like to see this being used for: Self-destructing computers. When the machine receives the self-destruct command, it flips the switch on the flash and POOF! it's gone.
    • I *love* human nature. Every time we make a scientific discovery, the thought process is

      1) Wow. hummph. neat. cool!
      2) I wonder if i can make any money off this.
      3) How could we make this into a weapon?

      aieeee.

      -K.

  • In a related story...

    The MPAA and RIAA are proposing that all hard disk platters be fabricated from carbon nanotubes with an overhead photoflashe builtin -- along with the exclusive right to control over that flash.

    That'll show those damn pirates and "hackers"...

    -Turkey
  • Someone once said that great discoveries in science are not followed by an expression of 'Eureka, I found it!', but rather by an expression of 'Hey, that's not supposed to happen.... hmmmm... that is interesting though... I wonder what would happen if....'

    I love these types of discoveries.

  • Obligatory Hindenburg... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Junior J. Junior III ( 192702 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @01:11PM (#3417334) Homepage
    So... When are they going to announce the ticket price for the blimp they're going to have to make out of these nanotubes?
  • They found out about this before they sold super futuristic clothes out of this. Imagine what would have happened if this hadn't been discovered until someone tried to take a picture of junior! I know, slim chance it would have made it that far without a picture being taken of it, but still...

    Luckily, it's only a specific type of nanotube that's vulnerable. The double walled ones are supposedly not vulnerable to this problem. I would still like them to test it against ultraviolet and infrared flashes, and x-rays (imagine going to the dentist's office and catching fire!).

    BlackGriffen
  • Hey maw! Bring out tha Polaroid!

  • OK, who's the troll that snapped a flash picture of their web site? Seems the thing has exploded and is no longer up.

  • The next level of pornography: clothing that is invisible when you take a picture of it! Ladies can be walking around normally, and then the paparazzi jump out and disrobe them with an innocent-seeming camera flash, and everything goes downhill from there. Story at eleven.
  • How quickly do you think the tubes unzip? Was that a sonic boom?

    Must be some use in a nano-size reactor that heats to 700C while shooting its contents and anything on its surface into the air.

    If you have two tubes next to each other unzipping into a hornlike shape simultaneously, you'd think there would be some neat shockwaves happening. Certainly something is forcing air out quickly.

Slashdot Top Deals

Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman

Close