197
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
197 points (97.1% liked)
Futurology
4138 readers
9 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Not a catch, majority of diamonds are used in industries and need to be small.
It’s a catch when your perspective is hoping it will impact the negatives of the jewelry industry.
The problem wouldn't be fixed even then. The jewelery companies have people convinced that the only diamonds that are worth it are mined from the earth by a real human slave. Fixing that problem has nothing to do with gemstones.
Is this still the case? I feel like I've seen "conflict free" as a selling point for (presumably labgrown) diamonds.
Me too. I've also heard synthetic gemstones can have colours and structures unlike anything that can form naturally. I want one of those, so that nobody would mistake it for a mined stone.
Will never happen until De beers exits the stage or is forced to.
We already have incredibly easy to make and cheap diamonds that can rival and surpass any natural sized ones.
They do not sell nearly as well because De beers has convinced everyone natural diamonds are a scarce resource, while they have a monopoly on the supply, of which there is no actual scarcity.
What's the biggest synthetic diamond we've made so far? Has anyone made diamond spectacles or windows?
They're quite brittle, so probably not a window like you're thinking.
https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=15962
10mm diameter for just over £1000.
Ah, so still not quite Cullinan-scale yet. Optical quality is probably better though.
I'm surprised diamonds aren't used more for lenses. Given its high index of refraction, it seems like an ideal material.
Yeah, the optical quality seems to be the main point. I assume there's few fields where that level of precision is worth it though. I doubt we're about to see it on an iPhone any time soon.