Synthetic Diamonds

ScumLord

Aurum wrote: »

I suppose the primary reason people prefer natural diamonds is because they are rarer.

Diamond is just carbon, carbon isn't rare at all. diamond is just gone off useless turf at the end of the day.

Diamonds will lose their appeal soon enough, the synthetic stuff has loads of applications so much so diamonds will become much more common to the point I think it'll effect their appeal in general. If your table and fridge are made out of diamond you won't be so inclined to make a fuss about a bit stuck to a piece of soft metal.

joseph brand

Aurum wrote: »

I suppose the primary reason people prefer natural diamonds is because they are rarer. Even though diamonds are currently stockpiled there is definitely a finite supply. Some people also like the fact that they are wearing something that has taken billions of years to form, and to develop into its current sparkly state. They will also hold their re-sale value better than synthetics (though diamonds that aren't purchased at cost value probably aren't the best investment choice.) I suppose its comparable to owning a very good copy of a Cezanne, and an actual Cezanne. Aesthetically, the differences may be minuscule, they're equally decorative, but one is the real thing and the other isn't. And you know that it isn't.

Firstly they aren't as rare as they are made out to be (by those selling them). Secondly, women who wear them haven't a clue about how long it took for them to form, or the temperatures and pressures involved. And lastly, unless you are a gemologist you can't tell the difference.

Women like them because they are told to like them and because they are shiny. Gold is a better investment. Build up some bullion.

rubadub

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Originally Posted by Mike 1972 View Post
John Logie Barid onetime attmpted to produce an artificial diamond by embedding two copper rods and a piece of coal in concrete and connecting it across the main electricity supply line for Glasgow

You just don't get that level of mad scientist anymore.

joseph brand wrote: »

. Gold is a better investment. Build up some bullion.

Just remembered this story

A Northern Ireland man who tried to turn his own faeces into gold by putting it on an electric heater has been jailed for three months.

The bizarre experiment, carried out by Paul Moran, 30, caused around £3,000 worth of damage to his Housing Executive home in a block of flats at Derrin Park in Enniskillen in July.

Upon his release he will spend a further 12 months on licence.

Moran admitted arson and endangering the lives of others.

His Honour Judge McFarland told him: “Rather bizarrely you were attempting to make gold from human faeces and waste products.

“It was an interesting experiment to fulfil the alchemist’s dream, but wasn’t going to succeed.”

While outlining the circumstances of the case at Enniskillen Magistrates Court, prosecuting counsel Robin Steer, told those present that at 7.12pm on July 24 last year the Fire Brigade was called to Moran’s flat at Derrin Park in Cornagrade, Enniskillen.

A police officer who was at the scene overheard Moran tell someone he had put “fertiliser” on a heater.

Moran’s barrister, Des Fahy, agreed that the general circumstances of the case were bizarre. He said Moran was a man of considerable intellectual ability but there was a clear problem over the years relating to drug abuse.

The judge noted that Moran was now on anti-psychotic medication and agreed with the findings of a pre-sentence report, which said he did not pose “a significant risk of serious harm”.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/man-who-tried-to-turn-his-faeces-into-gold-is-jailed-16066385.html#ixzz1f1Or4f7t

ScumLord

joseph brand wrote: »

Firstly they aren't as rare as they are made out to be (by those selling them). Secondly, women who wear them haven't a clue about how long it took for them to form, or the temperatures and pressures involved. And lastly, unless you are a gemologist you can't tell the difference.

Women like them because they are told to like them and because they are shiny. Gold is a better investment. Build up some bullion.

But gold is no better, while it's genuinely rare (until we get into space) it's only real value to most people is it's shininess.

iguana

joseph brand wrote: »

Are synthetic diamonds also called simulated diamonds?
Just checking ebay here and the simulated diamonds show up as being cubic zirconia. These are different than proper synthetic/ simulated right?
Confusing. I'm looking for lab made carbon copies of diamonds (pardon the pun).
Also, anyone got any links to good sites selling them?

Thanks.

http://greenkarat.com/

I haven't bought any diamonds from them but I did get my wedding rings there and they were great to deal with.

Mike 1972

danniemcq wrote: »

although that'd be weird knowing someone elses finger was in your fiances ring

Its something you probably shouldnt dwell on TBH :pac:

biko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWhtkkOYoxo

rubadub

ScumLord wrote: »

But gold is no better, while it's genuinely rare (until we get into space) it's only real value to most people is it's shininess.

Its got great corrosion resistance, so even though it has a high price it is used in loads of electronics. This why you get gold plated contacts on earphone connections etc.

They still use it for teeth too, my dentist was saying I might have to get a gold crown, I was pretty surprised they still would do them, he offered 3 types of fillings before for another job -so is not some auld codger stuck in his old ways.

Mike 1972

Anyone know what kind of diamonds (i.e. artificial/natural/blood) are used in Drills or record styli ?

ScumLord

rubadub wrote: »

Its got great corrosion resistance, so even though it has a high price it is used in loads of electronics. This why you get gold plated contacts on earphone connections etc.

They still use it for teeth too, my dentist was saying I might have to get a gold crown, I was pretty surprised they still would do them, he offered 3 types of fillings before for another job -so is not some auld codger stuck in his old ways.

I'd be more than happy to see gold use restricted to manufacturing and medical seeing as it's so rare. Our digital revolution could be at risk if we run out of useful gold before we get into space where there's probably gold mountains floating around the place.

I just don't get jewellery as a whole, don't like it and when I see people wearing it I think of animal preening and small minded tribes that don't know any better. I don't think wearing status symbols is something modern humans should be wasting their time on, unless you have a clear symbolic reason to wear some IE your married or you got injured in a war. Otherwise I don't see the point.

44leto

The things they are researching with these synthetic diamonds and it is not making jewellery.

This technology will change the world, you have a material that is strong and the best heat conductor in nature. Also they have unusual electrical properties. You are talking stronger materials, supercomputers, and on and on, millions is being poured into this tech.

Aurum

joseph brand wrote: »

Firstly they aren't as rare as they are made out to be (by those selling them). Secondly, women who wear them haven't a clue about how long it took for them to form, or the temperatures and pressures involved. And lastly, unless you are a gemologist you can't tell the difference.

Women like them because they are told to like them and because they are shiny. Gold is a better investment. Build up some bullion.

Firstly, I'm a woman and I do appreciate their process of formation. Secondly, though there may be quite a large amount of diamonds, there isn't a large supply of reasonable sized, high quality diamonds. A lot of them are so clouded that they look like lumps of glass, a huge amount have inclusions. A perfectly cut, high quality, reasonably large diamond is a rare and beautiful thing. And I did include the proviso that they weren't the best investment choice, but they'll hold their resale value far, far better than other luxury purchases, like very expensive electronics, clothing and cars.

ScumLord

Aurum wrote: »

Firstly, I'm a woman, I wear them, and I do appreciate their process of formation. Secondly, though there may be quite a large amount of diamonds, there isn't a large supply of reasonable sized, high quality diamonds. A lot of them are so clouded that they look like lumps of glass, a huge amount have inclusions.

Or is that just what they told you so you'd pay thousands for something that some kid dug out of his shoe.

Mike 1972

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't think wearing status symbols is something modern humans should be wasting their time on, unless you have a clear symbolic reason to wear some IE your married or you got injured in a war. Otherwise I don't see the point.

Dunno why you make the distinction Just because the latter practices happen to be longstanding and/or more widespread doesnt make them any more worthy of preservation.

minidazzler

Joey the lips wrote: »

a good diamond is like a good women.

Very Rare

Very Beautiful(naturally)

and

Very expensive


If you had loads of plastic synthetic ones you could not appreciate there beauty or would end up with a kerry katonia or Katie price.

red menace wrote: »

The real value of Diamond is it's not abundant in supply

Diamonds are not rare, there is just a monopoly on them from de beers which keeps them in short supply on purpose.

Cookie_Monster

joseph brand wrote: »

Are synthetic diamonds also called simulated diamonds?
Just checking ebay here and the simulated diamonds show up as being cubic zirconia. These are different than proper synthetic/ simulated right?
Confusing. I'm looking for lab made carbon copies of diamonds (pardon the pun).
Also, anyone got any links to good sites selling them?

Thanks.

Simulated is anything made of other materials made to look like a diamond, glass, zirconium etc
synthetic is a real diamond (carbon) but made rather than naturally occurring.

Diamond Innovations at the M1/M50 junction make them, may be worth seeing if they can provide you with anything, though generally it's nothing bigger than flakes to go on drill heads for Libyian oil wells. They do have a jewerly front to the business also.

Capt'n Midnight

ScumLord wrote: »

But gold is no better, while it's genuinely rare (until we get into space) it's only real value to most people is it's shininess.

There is about 4Kg of gold per person in seawater.

Diamonds are very, very common in space, centre of most gas giants, and some stars is mostly diamond cf.. Lucy

Aurum

ScumLord wrote: »

Or is that just what they told you so you'd pay thousands for something that some kid dug out of his shoe.

No, it isn't. There is a huge spectrum of diamond grading, a lot of diamonds are worth very little because they have so many flaws. It also requires significant skill to cut a diamond to optimally reflect the light. There is also the cost associated with sourcing and mining diamonds (rarely found in small children's shoes unfortunately.) Also, when buying a diamond ring, pendant etc. a large chunk of the price is going towards the jewelers, goldsmith who created the setting, and hefty VAT. The only argument I'd agree with is that a small group of "designer" jewelers like Cartier and Tiffany are charging hugely inflated prices for their pieces, including diamonds.

Cookie_Monster

Just read some sci fi, diamonds will be worthless junk once hyperdiamond and carbon nanotubes are practical


(Gold is also useful for it's heat dissipation properties and conductivity, hence it's use in electronics etc)

Wibbs

Aurum wrote: »

No, it isn't. There is a huge spectrum of diamond grading, a lot of diamonds are worth very little because they have so many flaws. It also requires significant skill to cut a diamond to optimally reflect the light. There is also the cost associated with sourcing and mining diamonds (rarely found in small children's shoes unfortunately.) Also, when buying a diamond ring, pendant etc. a large chunk of the price is going towards the jewelers, goldsmith who created the setting, and hefty VAT. The only argument I'd agree with is that a small group of "designer" jewelers like Cartier and Tiffany are charging hugely inflated prices for their pieces, including diamonds.

Do you work for DeBeers? Diamond cutting is indeed a skill, though the basic diamond needs it far more than other gem stones who look a lot better with a lot less work. As I said earlier in this thread;

Wibbs wrote: »

Exactly. Diamonds overall are actually quite common as a gemstone. http://www.diamondcuttersintl.com/myths-about-diamonds-1/ read number 2 myth. It puts their "rarity" in proportion. For the moby users "There are really enough diamonds to give each man, woman and child in the United States a whole cupful.".

A large coloured stone with few imperfections is rare, yet deBeers tells us colourless is the way to go. Of course as its the more common. Find a red diamond and name your price. The vast majority sold are half and one carat glassy yokes that as far as nature is concerned are two a penny. The world production of gem quality annually is 12 tonnes. That's 12 tonnes of the yokes a year. They're about as rare as farts in a vegan household.

You'll note I specify "gem quality", not milky flawed stones with lots of inclusions.

Wibbs wrote: »

I'd say diamonds are like tarted up dangerously blonde dolly birds. Its all about the lighting, they're not rare, they're way overpriced for what you end up with and you really dont wanna see one in the rough.

90% of women(or men) wouldnt have a clue about the difference. Saying a diamond is the highest quality gem is like saying a Tag Heuer is the highest quality watch(they're not. Not even close). Its all about advertising. I can pretty much guarantee that if you gave the vast majority of people a rhinestone ring they'll not spot it, never mind a synthetic diamond.

Wibbs wrote: »

Diamonds, except for exceptional(and usually strongly coloured) ones weren't particularly valued before about 100 years ago(rubys, emeralds and sapphires held much more cache. Rubies are still more valued carat for carat than diamonds). Then the hype grew around them. It's all about advertising and keeping deBeers and their cronies in the supply chain in business. It really is one of those conspiracies that's actually true.

They rigidly control the supply. Diamonds are not that rare. Much of this talk of "blood diamonds" is more about them controlling the supply and keeping the price up, than any humanitarian concern. I wouldnt be looking to closely at their official diamond mines on that score. I dont see the locals actually digging them out getting rich.

I'd stand by all of that. Gem quality emeralds, sapphires and rubies are rarer, yet we're told diamonds are the thing? And we hear feck all about "blood" rubies to boot. Nice enough gem, if bloodless and a little common, but IMHO not even close to worth the hype surrounding them. Give me a ruby any day. More human juices involved.

Aurum

Wibbs wrote: »

Do you work for DeBeers? Diamond cutting is indeed a skill, though the basic diamond needs it far more than other gem stones who look a lot better with a lot less work. As I said earlier in this thread;

You'll note I specify "gem quality", not milky flawed stones with lots of inclusions.





I'd stand by all of that. Gem quality emeralds, sapphires and rubies are rarer, yet we're told diamonds are the thing? And we hear feck all about "blood" rubies to boot. Nice enough gem, if bloodless and a little common, but IMHO not even close to worth the hype surrounding them. Give me a ruby any day. More human juices involved.

You're right about other stones being rarer, and I prefer them too. I think one of the attractions of diamonds though is that they look good on all skin tones, and are pretty set in either platinum or yellow gold. Stones like rubies can look rather dead against a typical Irish skin tone.

dan185

danniemcq wrote: »

i actually had a chat with my GF about this one drunken night (i am a fairly political guy and i'm wary about diamonds and their trade funding wars) and she seemed to kinda agree, so either synthetic or an old ring from an antique(Sp) shop. although that'd be weird knowing someone elses finger was in your fiances ring

I laughed too much at this.

kumate_champ07

Degag wrote: »

Because if the wimmins ever found out, there would be war.

Ironically real diamonds cause wars

whatdoicare

From what I know of diamonds - synthetic ones all have a yellow tint to them that is not preventable. It happens in the process of creating them.

The most sought after diamonds are ones that are totally clear- no yellow. Some people like the yellow tint but me, I hate pee coloured diamonds, so have a real diamond with a high clarity rating and is virtually colourless.

If I could get diamonds with a purple or blue tint, I'd be more likely to go for the synthetic version. The fact that it is not naturally created doesn't bother me at all.

starlit

A real diamond shines, sparkles and glitter, but a plastic/synthetic one doesn't!

44leto

A real diamond has a history, it was forged in the Earth aeons ago. It is a genuine creation of nature and rare. There is a romance to them. Just as DeBeers said so.

A synthetic diamond is created in a lab, its just an expensive but cheaper bead. Its a reproduction it lacks the romance of authenticity.

It will be interesting now as they are near perfecting the clear diamond, a mass produced clear diamond is what de beers fear, they then could be routinely placed in jewellery.

Then Debeers lose a market in smaller jewels. A diamond becomes less valued. But the future of this industry is in product and industrial applications, they are truly world changing.

lab man

believe me an i know it,
de beers wont lose they never do

kumate_champ07

Im trying to find a recent book that was written about how diamonds became associated with love/engagements/weddings thru clever marketing.

this is a short read:
"De Beers hired advertising firms, starting with N.W. Ayer in the late 1930s, to render axiomatic the idea that diamonds = true love. De Beers and Ayer didn't invent diamond engagement rings but did rescue a fading concept--in 1932 worldwide diamond sales had been only $100,000. Ayer's ploys ranged from planting news stories about newly betrothed celebrities flaunting big rocks to positioning diamonds as heirlooms, preventing the market from being flooded with secondhand goods. (The market for used diamonds is dismal, by the way.) The campaign worked--U.S. wholesale diamond sales increased from $23 million in 1939 to $2.1 billion in 1979. The J. Walter Thompson agency performed a similar miracle in Japan in the 1960s, essentially creating a tradition of diamond engagement rings out of thin air. "

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2524/is-a-diamonds-price-a-true-measure-of-its-value

kumate_champ07

N.W Ayer & Son created one of the most recognized slogan of the 20th century, “A Diamond is Forever.” When the founder of De Beers, Harry Oppenheimer and president of N.W Ayer & Son, Gerold M. Lauck had a meeting in 1938, they discussed a marketing campaign that would change the falling price of diamonds at the time. At the time, the idea of engagement rings decorated with diamonds wasn’t very popular in Europe because of this the campaign was promoted in the United States where interests of diamonds were very high. De Beers told Ayer, that they did not ask any other agencies for this task, and if Ayer’s plan was successful, De Beers would have N.W Ayer & Son become the exclusive agency for De Beers’ interest within the United States. This motivated Ayer, who soon proposed that their campaign should move the Americans spending demographic towards larger and more expensive diamonds. To successfully achieve their goal, Ayer suggested that they reinforce the relationship if diamonds with love and romance. This prove successful as both men and women were caught in the relationship if diamonds being a gift of love. Today, the slogan created for De Beers still remains today and the relationship of love, romance and diamonds are still prominent. [6]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._W._Ayer_%26_Son#.22Diamonds_are_Forever.22_slogan_with_De_Beers.22