Re: [math-fun] Diamonds for dopes
Mike Stay <metaweta@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, you just need to have a neutron tunnel from one nucleus to the other across the barrier.
True, but the adjacent carbon atoms are so distant from each other on a nuclear scale that what you're describing is a C13 decaying by emitting a neutron, and that neutron eventually being captured by a C12 nucleus. If C13 (or C12) decays by that or any other means with a half-life of less than about 10^21 years, I'm sure someone would have noticed by now. Several isotopes of much less common elements are known to have half-lives of 10^21 up to more than 10^24 years. Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
If we're going to store the entirety of human history & culture in a diamond lattice, it makes sense to ensure that the info won't degrade for a while, at least!
I agree. That's why I think diamonds make more sense than other crystals. Diamonds are more durable. They're also no more expensive, given that carbon is ubiquitous and any such crystal would have to be assembled by molecular nanotechnology in any case. So the rarity of natural diamonds is irrelevant. They're also lighter, atom for atom, than most other crystals. And less toxic. And prettier.
BTW, suppose that some civilization has *already* encoded its information in diamond & sent it Fed Ex (via meteorite drone) to Earth. Why are we wasting time with SETI instead of reading every diamond we find?
Reading every diamond we find might be worthwhile once we get molecular nanotechnology. We're *already* in the era of big data. They may already be doing automated scans of images from nearly all cameras viewing the public, for images of wanted criminals. In a few years they may test all trash for fingerprints and DNA traces, and all sewage for DNA traces, for the same purpose.
Also, BTW, it looks like DNA data storage may be a lot closer to hand than C12/C13 diamond storage. Is there a way to somehow crystallize & stabilize DNA at room temp (or higher) for stable data storage over thousands of years?
I don't know. DNA is notoriously fragile. And bacteria eat it.
Alternatively, is there an error-correcting information coding scheme for DNA that "heals" itself automatically against evolutionary pressures so that we could store the DNA info in real biologic organisms -- e.g., bristlecone pines ?
I doubt it, given that DNA was naturally selected to be capable of mutation. (If there was ever a race of organisms using a more stable genetic substrate, it was outcompeted by DNA-based organisms, as the latter were more capable of adapting to their ever-changing environment.)
Perhaps some of this "noncoding DNA" is *already* a message from the past -- e.g., intelligent dinosaurs that were destroyed 65Mya.
There are any number of ways to plant a message that could survive on Earth for millions, or even billions, of years. But if the goal is also for it to be *noticed*, well, see my April Fool's Day post of last year.
Speaking of the devil, the New Yorker has an article about the world's largest uncut gem-quality diamond up for auction at Sotheby's. http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/the-ungraspable-value-of-the-worl... 1109 carats = 0.489 pound = .222 kg = 221.8 grams It may sell for perhaps $70 million, which is still probably a bargain, given how many bits it can reliably (!) store. It's the size of a person's fist; too big for the MRI machines that they typically use to look inside & map large diamonds. http://www.newyorker.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Fox-TheUngraspableValueo... Perhaps there's a message in this diamond bottle? At 08:49 PM 6/8/2016, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
I agree. That's why I think diamonds make more sense than other crystals. Diamonds are more durable. They're also no more expensive, given that carbon is ubiquitous and any such crystal would have to be assembled by molecular nanotechnology in any case. So the rarity of natural diamonds is irrelevant. They're also lighter, atom for atom, than most other crystals. And less toxic. And prettier.
Reading every diamond we find might be worthwhile once we get molecular nanotechnology. We're *already* in the era of big data. They may already be doing automated scans of images from nearly all cameras viewing the public, for images of wanted criminals. In a few years they may test all trash for fingerprints and DNA traces, and all sewage for DNA traces, for the same purpose.
At the risk of this DNA sidebar hijacking the fascinating diamond thread:
="Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@KeithLynch.net> DNA was naturally selected to be capable of mutation
Yes, but DNA hacks its own mutability (talk about self-modifying code!) and regions mutate unevenly. New flu vaccines are required annually because it fluidly shuffles its antigenic sites. In contrast, some regions are so highly conserved across all Earth life that they have been proposed to test if we've infected Mars: http://arep.med.harvard.edu/pdf/Isenbarger08.pdf Richard Greenblatt's even argued ribosomal conservation supports panspermia.
FYI -- Doping pure diamonds with nitrogen to get quantum dots. Very, very cool, although I suspect that one could also get interesting properties with C12/C13 doping. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/09/nanomaterials_quantum_dots/ Boffins slap quantum dots on diamonds to create mutant nanomaterials Researchers have found a new way to speed up the process of doping nanomaterials by adding quantum dots to tiny diamonds, which could advance electronics and quantum computing in the future, according to a paper published in Nature Communications. Pure diamonds are rare, expensive, and have a rigid structure made out of carbon atoms. To make the doping process cheaper, researchers artificially produced the diamonds and inserted nitrogen atoms inside. The nitrogen is an impurity, breaking up the diamondÂs perfect carbon structure. It replaces one carbon atom in that structure with a nitrogen atom, and leaves an empty space where another carbon would normally be  also known as a nitrogen vacancy. http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160608/ncomms11820/full/ncomms11820.html Nanodiamond-based nanostructures for coupling nitrogen-vacancy centres to metal nanoparticles and semiconductor quantum dots http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160608/ncomms11820/pdf/ncomms11820.pdf
Why not use silicon instead of carbon? We create huge ingots of monocrystalline silicon in diamond lattices. Silicon has three stable isotopes, with mass numbers 28, 29, and 30. The abundance of Si-29 is almost 5%, while that of C-13 is only 1%. On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
FYI -- Doping pure diamonds with nitrogen to get quantum dots. Very, very cool, although I suspect that one could also get interesting properties with C12/C13 doping.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/09/nanomaterials_quantum_dots/
Boffins slap quantum dots on diamonds to create mutant nanomaterials
Researchers have found a new way to speed up the process of doping nanomaterials by adding quantum dots to tiny diamonds, which could advance electronics and quantum computing in the future, according to a paper published in Nature Communications.
Pure diamonds are rare, expensive, and have a rigid structure made out of carbon atoms. To make the doping process cheaper, researchers artificially produced the diamonds and inserted nitrogen atoms inside. The nitrogen is an impurity, breaking up the diamond’s perfect carbon structure. It replaces one carbon atom in that structure with a nitrogen atom, and leaves an empty space where another carbon would normally be – also known as a nitrogen vacancy.
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160608/ncomms11820/full/ncomms11820.html
Nanodiamond-based nanostructures for coupling nitrogen-vacancy centres to metal nanoparticles and semiconductor quantum dots
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160608/ncomms11820/pdf/ncomms11820.pdf
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
participants (4)
-
Allan Wechsler -
Henry Baker -
Keith F. Lynch -
Marc LeBrun