Glass In Spaaaaace 292
AnKsT wrote to mention an article on NASA's site about creating and manipulating glass in space. From the article: "In microgravity...you don't need a container. In Day's initial experiments, the melt--a molten droplet about 1/4 inch in diameter--was held in place inside a hot furnace simply by the pressure of sound waves emitted by an acoustic levitator. With that acoustic levitator, explains Day, 'we could melt and cool and melt and cool a molten droplet without letting it touch anything.' As Day had hoped, containerless processing produced a better glass. To his surprise, though, the glass was of even higher quality than theory had predicted."
*Crash!* (Score:4, Informative)
That might not be possible. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:That might not be possible. (Score:2)
Transparent Aluminium?
Re:That might not be possible. (Score:5, Interesting)
Transparent Aluminium (Score:4, Funny)
Transparent Aluminium [wikipedia.org] is a fictional material from the Star Trek [wikipedia.org] universe.
Re:That might not be possible. (Score:2)
Re:That might not be possible. (Score:2)
Here's one for ya (Score:2)
What is the sound of one glass breaking in space?
Re:*Crash!*Poot!* (Score:2)
Or wind.
Can't hear the wind but it makes a great propellant.
Mr. Day? more Mr. Dooms Day (Score:5, Funny)
Re:20/20 SpyVision. (Score:2)
Offtopic Offtopicness Meta-Discussion (Score:2, Insightful)
a) At least half of the interesting discussions on Slashdot are offtopic.
b) I think that one should be prepared to participate in any discussions arising from content in one's own signature.
In general, it's in pretty bad taste to put something potentially inflammatory in your signature, because of the tendency to incite threadjackings. Religion and politics both usually fall into that category, regardless of where it falls on the spectrum.
-If
ok... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:ok... (Score:2)
purity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:purity (Score:3, Informative)
Re:purity (Score:5, Insightful)
Heres a thought.
Will this sort of effect be important in hibernation and cryogenic storage of human beings?
Think about it like this, we develop a way to freeze people and thaw them out, test it for a few years here on Earth, deploy the system for space trials and find that the human body reacts quite differently to crystalisation under microgravity.
Re:purity (Score:2)
The article doesn't make it clear whether this property is unique to glasses, or whether it is normal for any molten material. It could be that semiconductor materal still does crystallize much more easily in microgravity.
Re:purity (Score:3, Funny)
Re:purity (Score:4, Informative)
Re:purity (Score:3, Informative)
Why do so many people have this mistaken idea that you can just jump out of orbit?
what a cliche (Score:2)
Siiiigh. I'm going to guess that's because SF authors heard about scientific theories/research.
Scifi authors are just people who are good at making semi-plausible science to help an otherwise boring plot along. It's like curry...the meat's pretty lackluster, so there's a strong sauce. Few of them actually envisioned stuff that w
Re:what a cliche (Score:3, Insightful)
A: Re-read Asimov and replace "robot" with "artifical intelligence." Or, better yet, "android."
B: Asimov created his rules to tell stories about the rules, including how they were a bad idea. Not to mention that there should be 5, not 3.
1: An android must perform only those tasks which it has been designed to do.
2: (So long as
Re:what a cliche (Score:2)
Wouldn't the "not allowing itself to come to harm" mean that you'd never be able to use androids for rescueing people or in areas where significant danger is involved (hazardous environment etc.)?
Re:what a cliche (Score:2)
Re:what a cliche (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not so sure that I, Robot portrays the rules as a "bad idea" but rather a source of inconsistency -- and therefore a source of great story material.
Re:what a cliche (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Build a better BONG (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Build a better BONG (Score:3, Funny)
Nachos anyone?
Re:Build a better BONG (Score:2)
Re:Build a better BONG (Score:2)
Re:Build a better BONG (Score:2)
Re:Build a better BONG (Score:2)
What a relief! (Score:5, Funny)
But how do you get it back? (Score:2)
Re:What a relief! (Score:2)
Re:What a relief! (Score:2)
Hopefully they will. Ever tried to purchase a large sheet of strong Low-E glass? It's not exactly cheap.
Put together an 8 foot long fish tank sometime and tell me it's cheap and plentiful.
Acryllic would be close if it wasn't so easy to scratch -- horrible for a large window.
Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:5, Interesting)
This article is a perfect example of the sort of technological advances that will be possible when we establish a space habitat capable of sustaining industrial production. Microgravity is a condition that is almost impossible to replicate here at the bottom of the gravity well, and we are just beginning to realize the applications.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
How about "Transparent Aluminum"?
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Second, what about things that simply cannot be produced in a terrestrial environment? I see no evidence that this is the case, but humor me: suppose you can fabricate semiconductors that are significantly higher-performing in mic
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
-InnerWeb
"Die Cast Construction it's a lost art." (Score:3, Insightful)
-Optimus Prime.
Some of you might not remember the Transformer's episode. However it's useful in regards to building in space. Using focused sunlight and magnets you could build space stations and space craft. It would solve the delema mentioned in another article about the aging shuttle fleet. Why carry stuff up, when we can use moon rocks to build it.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:4, Interesting)
This is one result that may or may not scale to industrial production.
I'm not closed minded, but I am skeptical.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
If research shows some kind of advantage of producing new types of glass under zero g, couldn't companies invest in some kind of apparatus like this and invent a process to produce their zero-g glasses on Earth?
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Robert Park and the American Physical Society have long been foes of both the Shuttle and the ISS. Take his comments with a grain of salt.
For example, take section 2 of the linked article - which criticizes a research program for not producing 'unique results'. Anyone familiar with science knows that non-unique results are as important as unique results.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
First off, the American Physical Society [aps.org] has no stance for or against the Shuttle and the ISS. They are a professional society for physicists. They occasionally perform studies or issue statements based on areas of their expertise. The only statement about the ISS that I am aware is Statement 91.2 [aps.org] and was released in 1991. Basically it said that the APS feels there is no current credible scientific ju
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
The word you are reaching for is "intolerant".
But being a dumbass, you wouldn't know the difference.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2, Insightful)
Knock, knock! Econ 101 is calling.
Inflation will increase that $7000/kg just much as it will devalue the $7000. So, based on your hypothetical of it not getting any cheaper to bring stuff out of orbit, 50 years from now it is going to cost a heck of a lot more than $7000/kg.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers! (Score:2)
Why this matters (Score:4, Informative)
"But why is that important? What's wrong with glass made of silica?
For windows silica is just fine. But glass made from other chemical compositions offers a panoply of unexpected properties. For example, there are "bioactive glasses" that can be used to repair human bones. These glasses eventually dissolve when their work is done. On the other hand, Day has developed glasses which are so insoluble in the body that they are being used to treat cancer by delivering high doses of radiation directly to a tumor site."
Cool beans!
Re:Why this matters (Score:2)
Re:Why this matters (Score:2)
Re:Why this matters (Score:3, Interesting)
Everything is made better... In Space (Score:2)
Re:Everything is made better... In Space (Score:2, Funny)
Sponge-Tron: Everything is chrome in the future!
I can see it now, orbital chrome plating factories!
Re:Everything is made better... In Space (Score:2)
Manufacturing in Space (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Manufacturing in Space (Score:3, Interesting)
Cost of Space Products (Score:3, Interesting)
Because the microgravity should allow for high chip yield and high quality, the remaining issue is cost of production.
Allowing for $10,000 per Kg (source [cato.org]) for a mature launch/return system like the Saturn 5,
Re:Cost of Space Products (Score:2)
Re:Manufacturing in Space (Score:2)
Up-to-date (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Up-to-date (Score:2)
And after that, they'll report that Bush won a third term in office.
Keep them out of this! (Score:2)
Unless, maybe, they can marry each other and one can be the President and the other can be the first, uhh, spouse?
Serious topic (Score:5, Insightful)
Did no one else see this? (Score:2, Funny)
How is this news? I realize the mentality of if I haven't seen it it's new to me, but come on.
Is there an update or something?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.
Container-less Glass (Score:4, Funny)
Right. Until there's an accident when someone is too busy playing with their velco stripe and a blob of molten glass goes into someone's eye on the other side of the station. If that happens over the state of California, Cal-OSHA will be all over the space station like Bill Clinton with an intern. They would have to shut down the space program until it was safe go back into space -- again.
Re:Container-less Glass (Score:2)
Oh, the horror, the horror. New insect overlords, indeed.
Re:Container-less Glass (Score:2)
Re:Container-less Glass (Score:2)
Like, no way! (Score:2, Interesting)
"He did some glass-melting experiments, trying to pull thin fibers out of melts," recounts Day. "During the low-gravity portion of the plane's flight, when g was almost zero, the fibers came out with no trouble. But during the double-gravity portion of the plane's flight, the fiber that he was pulling totally crystallized."
Like, totally, dude.
I guess "that" generation finally made it to the real world.
-Adam
Re:Like, no way! (Score:2)
There are two possible definitions here.
The standard use:
"...the fiber that he was pulling completely crystalized."
which would mean literally 100% of the fiber did crystalize, which I guess is suprising.
or the implied use, which means:
"...the fiber that he was pulling crystallized and suprised us." i.e. it may or may not have 100% crystalized, perhaps only 80% or even 50% crystalized, but the fact that it did was completely unexpected under those conditi
I for one, (Score:2)
Uh, now that I think about it, a beowulf cluster would be much more appropriate.
Brilliant! (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the perfect thing for moving spacestations and eventual moon colonization forward. The station and moon have to deal with micro-meteor showers, which don't bother us because the rocks burn up in the atmosphere. Better glass would be a great contribution to these places to put up with the showers without suffering the view- the first private places on the moon will likely be held by the ultra wealthy, and, by golly, they'll want a view! Astronauts would probably thing it's damn skippy, too.
Then, as most good inventions work, as the rich buy it, it eventually becomes cheaper and cheaper until Joe America can sit on his front porch with his friends on the moon and chuck empty beer cans at their super-glass dome without worry, just to watch them 'float' through the air.
Assuming they find an economical way to get the glass to Earth, this can be perfect for deep-sea scientific endevours- glass that will hold up to higher pressures would allow for long time monitoring of underwater ecosystems with less reliance on miniature subs and wetsuits. Perhaps we'll even get talking dolphins.
Re:Brilliant! (Score:2)
More geeks should learn about glass blowery. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:More geeks should learn about glass blowery. (Score:2)
Uhh, care to share one of these "algorithms"?
Re:More geeks should learn about glass blowery. (Score:2)
Re:More geeks should learn about glass blowery. (Score:3, Informative)
Gas in space (Score:2)
This reminds me of an old idea (Score:2)
Science article of the year award... (Score:2)
Learning is fun...
Re:I see potential (Score:2)
If you're smart, you'll start a company to capitalize on this future market
Wow, I really hope NASA people read Slashdot. Imagine that, without you they'd still be melting shit at random in space to kill time.
Thanks Mr. Obvious...
Re:Purer carbon nanotubes too? (Score:4, Informative)
Is it easier to purify carbon nanotubes in microgravity too?
Short answer: yes.
Re:Purer carbon nanotubes too? (Score:5, Funny)
Is it easier to purify carbon nanotubes in microgravity too?
Short answer: yes.
Long answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeees.
(Note: Length and pitch of the Long Answer may be affected by answerer's velocity relative to yourself.)
Long answer: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Meh. (Score:2)
Re:ok but.... (Score:2)
Re:ok but.... (Score:2)
Re:Let me think... (Score:3, Funny)
2- yes, from some asteroid. Easy.
3- launch from surface of asteroid - $50.
4- 5ft of hyper-high-quality lenses, nanooptics, etc may be well worth several $mln.
5- fill a rocket with bubblewrap or you'll end up with a lander full of glass shards.
6- profit.
Re:the glass was of even higher quality than theor (Score:2)
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)
Re:Not surprising (Score:2)