Live data from Hacker News

Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

scientificamerican.com

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#14
post #10

What was special about the first nuclear test, rather than the thousands of others, at least hundreds of which were also in the Nevada desert? Obviously it's historically significant, and the new forms of matter were first discovered there , so that's why trinitite is named after the site. But 80 years later, wouldn't we expect the other bomb sites to have just as many interesting chemical reactions?

The Trinity test took place in New Mexico, not Nevada.

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#15
While the news is interesting in itself, I found the lack of illustrations disappointing.

When discussing new novel molecular structures, one would think providing a concrete visuals of what they look like more interesting than human-scale photos of materials containing them?

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#16
> The only other known naturally forming quasicrystal was found inside meteorite fragments

Does it really count as "naturally forming" if we had to artificially construct and detonate a nuke during a carefully conducted experiment to create this one?

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#17
One language usage question, and one content question:

"Melted sand"?? Isn't it "molten sand"? Is my hunch completely wrong, or is the author not a native speaker? Neither am I, but melted sand sounds so weird to my ears.

    This all happened in a matter of seconds, so atoms didn’t have time to arrange into stable structures,[...]
Isn't seconds kinda like ages at that scale? Atoms needing longer than seconds to arrange under super high pressure sounds also dubious? But I am no expert in that area.

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#18

> The only other known naturally forming quasicrystal was found inside meteorite fragments Does it really count as "naturally forming" if we had to artificially construct and detonate a nuke during a carefully conducted experiment to create this one?

We’re a product of nature, it’s mistaken to believe we are above nature or that nuclear weapons aren’t also part of nature.

We’re also very much dependent on nature and natural forces.

So everything we do is, even if many steps removed, still an act of nature.

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#19

> The only other known naturally forming quasicrystal was found inside meteorite fragments Does it really count as "naturally forming" if we had to artificially construct and detonate a nuke during a carefully conducted experiment to create this one?

We’re a product of nature, it’s mistaken to believe we are above nature or that nuclear weapons aren’t also part of nature. We’re also very much dependent on nature and natural forces. So everything we do is, even if many steps removed, still an act of nature.

This is a valid argument, albeit a pointless one.

We use the term natural specifically to distinguish between the.. natural and artificial.

A term like that is necessary.

Re: Strange crystals found inside wreckage from the first nuclear bomb test

#20

One language usage question, and one content question: "Melted sand"?? Isn't it "molten sand"? Is my hunch completely wrong, or is the author not a native speaker? Neither am I, but melted sand sounds so weird to my ears. This all happened in a matter of seconds, so atoms didn’t have time to arrange into stable structures,[...] Isn't seconds kinda like ages at that scale? Atoms needing longer than seconds to arrange…

The sand melted, yielding a type of glass. Melt emphasizes a change.
Post reply on HN