They'll probably paint it with something to make it not transparent?

Ajh

@scarbrtj: damn.... i wanted to make that reference first... oh well...

johnthevulcan

I thought we'd get transparent aluminum before we'd get transparent carbon nanotube sheets... for transporting humpback whales into the future, mostly.

It'll take years to figure out the dynamics of this matrix.

scarbrtj

If you can see through the wings then we are just a second or two away from Wonder Woman's invisible jet. I would definitely fly in that.

Jasontrainer

Let's say they put this thing into mass production. How could they ensure the safety of carbon nanotube particles during manufacturing process? The particles could accumulate within human body and could cause cancer.

ywpark

"though I'm not sure how many people would balk at flying in a plane with wings you can partly see through. "

PAINT. Its been around for a while now.

Stacky Botrus

I'm thinking bullet-proof tee-shirts. Keeping the force cool you know!

Soon we can have our boys in the military wearing something resembling Tommy Bahama that can stop and RPG.

Technology rocks! And just where can I buy stock in the company that is in the forefront of this?

siville

This is absolutely spectacular. Hank Rearden Lives!!!

stryder100

@Stacky Botrus: Duh... IRONY

Kit Eaton

@ywpark: Pick 10 random manufacturing processes for stuff we take for granted nowadays, and I bet you 8 of them involve some pretty scarily hazardous stuff that makes the (still not strictly proven) health risk from nanotubes look teeny...

Kit Eaton

I guess big companies steel companies like Nucor and others need to start buying up these nano carbon companies fast if they want to still compete.

addiktion

@stryder100: +1

amacieli

But but but steel is REAL!

wingbatwu

@ywpark: That's what robots are for.

Mandatory_Field

"Whoa, check the legs on that chick in the Neon!"...

Mandatory_Field

Yea, yea, and very soon we'll all be taking a trip on a carbon nanotube space elevator to the moon. Tell me another one spaceman... ;)

fsusmithc2

Why hasn't the military considered using Nanotube artillery shells?? This stuff is strong, right?

ksat

Maybe no one else is sticking out into the middle of the ocean as hurricane bait, but if this stuff really were transparent, Im getting nanotube windows. No more putting up shutters and shit like that.

hkmp5n

@helldiver: I always thought it had more to do with aluminum in any form being significantly lighter than steel in any form - steel sheets are machinable to shape, it just so happens that weight is a more important concern.

In that regard, if the carbon nanotube fabric weighs less and functions better than current aluminum skins, it becomes a useful consideration. Unfortunately, the cost will probably keep them out of the air for a while.

ZekeSulastin

what do you do with a sheet of steel anyway?

I mean, steel is brittle and that is why is used mainly for big bulky items that don't flex much like fittings and structural members in buildings.
Aluminum on the other hand is used a lot more for sheeting panels in aircraft.
So, comparing the nanaotubes sheets with steel sheets doens't really tell me anything about their fatigue properties and suitability for aircraft components :P

helldiver

General Products Hull?

Necoras

@helldiver: Jesus, I didn't mean to come across so catty. I just really love steel. :P

ppiddy

@helldiver: Um, not all steel is brittle. One would hope that someone qualified to understand the fatigue properties and suitability of materials for airplanes would know that. See there's this thing, it's called annealing. You should look it up. Steel (depending on the type of course) is also about twice as resistant to fatigue as aluminum.

What's your car's body made of? What's your refrigerator made of? For that matter, what are the springs on your car made of, or the springs in a clock?

This is hardly going to replace steel in many applications. If I were aluminum, I'd be looking into my retirement plan, though.

ppiddy

If it is completely transparent then that would explain how spaceships in movies and TV have big bay windows.
You know it's basically a sheet of diamond. I wouldn't suspect that it would bend very well, and at first it will probably be more expensive.

reddingofish

What about the rust? Rust has the right to live too!

Curves

@Necoras:

I'm thinking it won't survive close proximity with a neutron star.

ilves

@stryder100:
+1 agreed, also for some reason I now want to go play Bioshock again.....

@werk

One question....can we use the same carbon we are pumping into our atmosphere to build these sheets? Is it the same carbon type? If yes, I can see huge carbon scrubbers filtering our air and harvesting the carbon would go directly to the factory to make these sheets. How wide are the sheets?

EVEs_Mako

@scarbrtj: SON OF A BITCH!!! I wanted to say that!!!

"Captain, there be whales!!"

B1663R

@Kit Eaton: I once roomed with a guy who worked at a factory that produced powdered aluminum for use in manufacturing aluminum parts. The guy came home every day with silver hands - and he was management and didn't handle the stuff himself, it just got everywhere. He joked more than once that his lungs must be shiny.

So yeah, manufacturing and health hazards, hand in metallic hand.

Killjoy

Steel can have a wide range of properties depending on the processing history, but it is by no means brittle in most conditions. It's used for structural applications because its ultimate strength greatly exceeds most other materials, particularly in terms of strength to cost. You would almost never use a brittle material in a structural application because brittle materials fail catastrophically. Ductile materials such as steel will absorb far more energy, flex and deform, before they fail. Aluminum is used in aircraft paneling because of its excellent strength-to-weight ratio. In terms of fatigue, Aluminum actually has disadvantages to steel. Steel has a fatigue limit, which is a load level below which the steel has a nearly infinite fatigue life. Aluminum has no such limit, so even at the smallest loads there is a finite number of cycles the component can experience before it fails. That's why inspection protocols are so important on aircraft.

MerciHaruhite

I want a pocket knife with a carbon nanotube blade.

Tank

@Curves: Oh the irony.

ripfire

@ scarbrtj

Humpback? people?

dOk

i want a carbon nanotube pencil, i will never lose at pencil fight buaa ha ha ha ha.
but really i cant wait they they start building buildings and bridges with this stuff. the new designs will be awesome

chaz9205

@stryder100: +100

@@werk: -1 for cheapening the reference

The Chad

@B1663R: Isn't it "Admiral, there be whales!". I mean while you don't have to respect the man, respect the rank. ;)

Git Em SteveDave loves this guy-->

@ripfire: I see what you did there.

Solaricide

@B1663R: SHIT! Also the first thing I thought of...

"Computer? Hello, Computer."

Solaricide

@MerciHaruhite: And that's why my bike has a hand-brazed steel frame.... It will last for ever as long as it doesn't get smashed.

Solaricide

@ksat:

because artillery is generally kinetic or explosive projectiles - the former needs only mass, not strength (which is backwards from nanotubes, which have high strength to mass) and the latter just needs some old fashioned TNT.

nutbastard

Computer. Compuuuter...hello computer?

Kayonesoft

@EVEs_Mako: from a chemical standpoint, carbon is carbon is carbon. the differences arise in how the carbon is stitched together. that's why diamond is very hard (nice strong crystaline structure) while graphite is not (carbon is layered in sheets that 'slide' over one another).

the only way one carbon atom can be fundamentally different from another is if there is a different number of neutrons in the nucleus of the atom (i.e. it's a different isotope). this doesn't really affect the ability of the atom to bond with other atoms. The only way one of these isotopes could interfere with carbon nanotubes is if carbon-14 were to spontaneously decay to nitrogen-14, leaving a hole in the side of the nanotube. luckily, only 0.0000000001% of carbon atoms are carbon-14.

stre

@Ajh: Exactly what I was thinking. But the Wonder Woman jet thing has potential.

rubicon_65

carbon nanotube cars would be nice...

ericigonzalez

@Kit Eaton:

Heh, Irony. Get it? We're talkin about metals..

kthxbye.

MavisPuford

mmm, actually, I have more problems with confidence in something that weighs as much as a humpback whale flying through the air than with something as light as an albatross

yogibimbi

@Jasontrainer: but would you take a dump in that

lilaliendog

"I'm not sure how many people would balk at flying in a plane with wings you can partly see through"

You can paint it or just manufacturer it with non translucent carbon.

But if people still have problems with it, there's always the brick against head trick or tranquilizers

7raczyk

Can I run my interwebs through these tubes?

Con Seannery

@EVEs_Mako:

You first have to chemically release it from the CO2 molecule. That's the real problem. It takes a lot of energy to break down that molecule on a mass scale.

BUT, historically, some research group typically comes up with a cheap and convenient catalyst to make it happen really fast. If that happens, then, yeah...convert all the carbon you want directly from the atmosphere right into raw materials. Nice.

FrankenPC

@ywpark: They never did prove that it's the tubes, they think it could be impurities in them from the manufacturing processes rather than the tubes themselves.

Con Seannery

"And these are no ordinary textiles either: they're transparent and way stronger than a sheet of steel."

OF THE SAME THICKNESS (which is retardly thin)

This is a news worthy but this stuff won't be replacing steel anytime between now and the next 20 years. Just because its stronger in one aspect then steel (it doesn't say yield, sheer, tensile etc) doesn't mean shit about its ability for form. Can this be welded like steel ? Can it be machined ? Probably not. Will it impact the composites market, yes, probably.

Sorry dude, no invisible jets for you.

este

@scarbrtj: Whew. Thought I was going to have to make this super-nerd reference.

Shoghon

@este:
I'm with you on that one.
On one side you have the materials science, on the other the manufacturability science of it.

Look at amorphous steel too. It's fairly easy to manufacture and something like 10 times stronger than titanium.... OK, so if we make a standard sheet gauge of it... how do we bend it?, conventional press breaks don't work.... Ahhhh. Now that's a little problem.

The news of carbon nanotube sheets is awesome... it will lead "to" materials in the future. But techniques to work those materials will need to be developed before the stuff can hit the market.
People forget that carbon composites have been around for 20+ years but are just now hitting the shelves and they are still expensive.

aec007

How much lighter than steel?

Amazing read. You could just grow the structure right on site.

Denver_80203

@helldiver, ppiddy: Aluminum isn't going anywhere, as long as you have the beverage industry. Also, since aluminum supply will be freed up, automakers will use it more extensively on average consumer priced autos.

logikgr

@Tank: So you can cut holes into other universes? Very subtle.

Barion

@Jasontrainer:

guys, this article is 3 years old!!!!!

[www.csiro.au]

take a look at the publish date, August 19th, 2005.
way to go gizmo.

gazork23

guys, this article is 3 years old!!!!!

[www.csiro.au]

take a look at the publish date, August 19th, 2005.
way to go gizmo.

gazork23

One of the HUGE drawbacks with carbon fibers in architectural applications is there is no way to fireproof them, yet. Spray on insulation [like every piece of steel gets] does not work with Carbon fibers. Carbon fiber has been an architectural pipe dream for awhile. Check this out, it is pretty cool, a few years old now but still relevant.

[www.erinaardianto.com]

kingglitch

from a guy who is actually the one on the ground making sure this stuff doesn't get in the water, you are very, very right. about the 8 out of 10 for hazardous chemicals. here is the problem: nanotech produces molecules that are super-reactive - and i mean unnaturally reactive - yet stable and dispersed. so they are very, very hard to test for health effects and even harder to test levels of pollution. that would be if there were even any real regulation, which there isn't. nanosilver is probably more scary, because there is more data, but don't take nanotubes lightly. the catalysts to make any nanoproduct are what are really bad, even though all the manufacturers claim the "closed loop system is perfectly safe." oh- and even if something isn't toxic to humans, it can still kill a treatment plant, and then its sewage in, sewage out.

ShrivalliCyparissus

can you say "future indestructable see-through clothing"?

Elasticity