11–20 of 21 posts
The article didn't mention the sticky tape method of making graphene, but they did put a link to an article about that [1]. Sticky tape (or Scotch tape) can also be used to make X-rays [2]. Now the only question is how to use a blender to make X-rays… [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11478645 [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/science/28xray.html
http://www.wired.com/2011/04/scotch-tape-lets-you-see-throug...
The article didn't mention the sticky tape method of making graphene, but they did put a link to an article about that [1]. Sticky tape (or Scotch tape) can also be used to make X-rays [2]. Now the only question is how to use a blender to make X-rays… [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11478645 [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/science/28xray.html
It can also be used to see through frosted glass. http://www.wired.com/2011/04/scotch-tape-lets-you-see-throug...
I'm having a hard time understanding why someone shouldn't make this at home. This sounds like the perfect experiment I could run with the kids to get them excited about material science. It doesn't need to be a perfect layer of graphene, even a sludge would be good to show them, get them brainstorming about how they would separate out the sludge. Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't tr…
Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't try this at home? Aren't most nano-particles suspected of causing cancer? I assume this method would generate fairly small pieces that might make people worry about that. Also the blender mix would probably (1) make lots of foam and overflow the blender, and (2) stain everything it touches.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't try this at home? Aren't most nano-particles suspected of causing cancer? I assume this method would generate fairly small pieces that might make people worry about that. Also the blender mix would probably (1) make lots of foam and overflow the blender, and (2) stain everything it touches.
That was a concern from the 90's. However you are being exposed to the "nano particles" everyday already. Rubber from car tires decomposes on the highway into particles of the scale that they can be considered "nano particles", for example. When ever you drive on the highway, you're stirring up clouds of them.
CNTs aren't graphine, and I'm not sure that graphine can be easily made into tubes, but it still should give some pause for thought.
I'm having a hard time understanding why someone shouldn't make this at home. This sounds like the perfect experiment I could run with the kids to get them excited about material science. It doesn't need to be a perfect layer of graphene, even a sludge would be good to show them, get them brainstorming about how they would separate out the sludge. Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't tr…
Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't try this at home? Aren't most nano-particles suspected of causing cancer? I assume this method would generate fairly small pieces that might make people worry about that. Also the blender mix would probably (1) make lots of foam and overflow the blender, and (2) stain everything it touches.
The main obstacle I see here (based on this report) is uncertainty about how to separate the material after you've blended it and what exactly you can apply it to without adding lots of expensive lab equipment. One candidate that springs to mind is using it for printing circuits, given graphene's high conductivity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't try this at home? Aren't most nano-particles suspected of causing cancer? I assume this method would generate fairly small pieces that might make people worry about that. Also the blender mix would probably (1) make lots of foam and overflow the blender, and (2) stain everything it touches.
Eh, do it in your shed, and use an affordable respirator (available at any hardware store). If you have a place where you can make a bit of a mess then the cost of safety gear is low, construction-grade stuff will be adequate for most non-biological use cases. You can get special filters for asbestos, lead, and similar hazardous substances which contractors encounter frequently in old houses. The main obstacle I see…
Random chuncks of graphene thrown toguether, touching in random directions aren't a good conductor at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was a concern from the 90's. However you are being exposed to the "nano particles" everyday already. Rubber from car tires decomposes on the highway into particles of the scale that they can be considered "nano particles", for example. When ever you drive on the highway, you're stirring up clouds of them.
While the general nano particle fear is a little extreme, some of the structures (specifically carbon nano-tubes) have a similar shape as Asbestos, which does cause cancer due to it's shape. CNTs aren't graphine, and I'm not sure that graphine can be easily made into tubes, but it still should give some pause for thought.
Also worth bearing in mind is that, I believe, wherever you make one form of carbon you'll probably end up making other forms too, e.g. buckyballs (C60) and carbon nanotubes have both been found in soot. So even if graphene is safe, I have no idea if this process will produce other potentially unsafe things too. A friend is actually working on looking at the effect carbon nanotubes have on lung epithelial cells, so I know there's interest there.
That said, I imagine you'd find all these products in a standard wood fire too, but then I recall reading that smoke from wood fires is as bad or worse for you as cigarette smoke so perhaps that's little comfort...
Note: I am not a doctor and not an expert in this field either.
I'm having a hard time understanding why someone shouldn't make this at home. This sounds like the perfect experiment I could run with the kids to get them excited about material science. It doesn't need to be a perfect layer of graphene, even a sludge would be good to show them, get them brainstorming about how they would separate out the sludge. Is there a real reason other than difficulty, why someone shouldn't tr…