Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Spray-On Liquid Glass

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the smooth-move dept.

Earth 293

bLanark writes with news of a new substance that can be sprayed on for a durable, easy-to-clean film on almost any substance, hard or soft. The liquid glass is essentially pure silicon dioxide, and it goes on in a layer 15 to 30 atoms thick. It is breathable and flexible, but waterproof and resistant to bacterial growth. The patent is held by a German company, Nanopool, which is in discussion with many parties about a wide range of uses: keeping public spaces sanitary, keeping restaurants clean, and keeping cars or trains clean. "The spray forms a water-resistant layer, meaning it can be cleaned using only water. Trials by food-processing companies showed that sterile surfaces covered with a film of liquid glass were equally clean after a rinse with hot water as after their usual treatment with strong bleach."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (0)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001782)

we pour a gallon of that crud down the sink to kill 16 germs. not that a strong base like bleach is great for mother earth either.

Re:bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (1)

bakawolf (1362361) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001810)

Because you really want to breed super germs on your counter top.

Re:bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (3, Insightful)

bistromath007 (1253428) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002148)

I think that was his point and he's just not incredibly competent at communicating it.

Re:bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (4, Informative)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002432)

we pour a gallon of that crud down the sink to kill 16 germs. not that a strong base like bleach is great for mother earth either.

Uh... OK.

So, first of all, silicon dioxide (the subject of the article) is soluble in strong bases. So it won't take long for your "strong base" to dissolve this stuff away. Or any strong base. Heck bird poop would probably suffice.

Secondly, bleach is primarily an oxidizer, secondarily it is somewhat basic but not impressively so. Perhaps you're thinking of some other strongly basic solution you pour down the drain, like, maybe lye based drain cleaner?

Thirdly as far as mother earth vs sodium hypochlorite, its ridiculously unstable and decomposes away before it even hits the sewage treatment plant. I suppose that by Environmentalist Religion "original sin" doctrine it is bad, in that everything any human does is always inherently bad. But compared to most things poured down drains, bleach is rather harmless. You can drink it when highly diluted as a water purifier.

It "sounds good", but it indicates a lot of weird ideas about basic chemistry (basic, get that pun?)

Re:bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (5, Insightful)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002548)

Bleach is the nuke that people who are serious about killing bacteria use to clean their counters with. Antibacterial cleaners are the things the amateurs at home use.

If you can satisfy the pros that they don't need to use bleach on their counters then the only remaining reason for anyone to use an antibacterial cleaner on his counter at home is superstition.

Re:bleach is great but focus on antibiotics (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002650)

Actually, chlorine bleach (NaOCl - sodium hypochlorite) breaks down to NaCl (salt) and H2O (water), and O2 (Oxygen).

As far as industrial cleaners go, it's pretty much as good for the environment as you're going to get.

winshield repair? (3, Interesting)

ak_hepcat (468765) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001794)

Can I now avoid costly windshield replacements by simply spraying this stuff on my windshield after a ding storm, or crack?

Because that'd be nice.

Re:winshield repair? (4, Funny)

fuo (941897) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001832)

Probably not... unless you don't mind having having only 15 to 30 atoms between you and the outside world.

Re:winshield repair? (5, Funny)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001910)

Commando baby, it's the only way.

Re:winshield repair? (2, Funny)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002140)

Can't you just spray more then?

Re:winshield repair? (5, Informative)

smellsofbikes (890263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001992)

Can I now avoid costly windshield replacements by simply spraying this stuff on my windshield after a ding storm, or crack?

The problem with having a crack isn't the divot where the crack started, it's the leading end of the crack. When you apply stress to a material that has a crack, the force per unit area at the tip of the crack approaches infinity, so what you have to do to keep the crack from spreading is increase its area. That's why windshield repair people drill holes at the ends of the cracks and then fill them.

Even if your intent is just to fill the much smaller divots in the glass, 30 molecules thick isn't going to make much difference. What you need is a material that has roughly the same index of refraction as the glass, that you can spread over the divots like makeup.

Re:winshield repair? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002354)

>> roughly the same index of refraction as the glass, that you can spread over the divots like makeup

What's the index of refraction of Tammy Faye Bakker?

Think bigger (4, Interesting)

RingDev (879105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002026)

Forget your windshield, think YOUR ENTIRE CAR!

No more clear coats, no more waxing, no more "rubberized under coating". If it is cheap, and light enough, you could coat every body panel and frame member with the stuff, virtually guarantying a rust proof existence.

-Rick

Or even bigger (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002158)

Or entire -train- cars. In europe, they all seem to be coated in stupid spray paint logos from lazy taggers.

Several organisations are said to be testing the product, including a train company in Britain, which is using liquid glass on both the interior and exterior of the train,

I'm guessing they're hoping this will prevent idiots from vandalizing trains, since why would you care about dirt being on your freight train. Then again, shipping companies might not care much about vandalism anyway.

Re:Or even bigger (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002382)

why would you care about dirt being on your freight train.

Weight. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the weight of all the dust and dirt on a large freight train added up to hundreds of pounds, possibly coming close to a ton on some of the largest ones. Hauling all that extra weight cross-country adds to the fuel costs. If the dust and dirt don't cling to this coating very well, it may well pay for itself quickly in lowered fuel costs in a very short time.

Re:Think bigger (3, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002184)

Dream on.

While it might make a nice coat for the paint job, it is likely that a glass coating is not very suitable for parts that undergo sharp mechanical stresses, like the suspension.

But more to the point: undercoats in general have been found to be a bad idea. They tend to encourage destructive corrosion wherever they are compromised, while parts without such an impermeable waterproof coating will rust more gracefully.

Re:Think bigger (1)

grepdisc (1352977) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002358)

As we learned on Duck Tales [tv.com] , no glass is ever completely unbreakable.

Meh (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002192)

Cracks up to a few inches long can be sealed already with existing resins that windshield replacement/repair companies use, and most insurance policies (at least here in the US) cover repair for free with no deductible; only full replacements incur such.

Re:Meh (5, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002302)

Part of the reason for this is that water tends to act almost like a "catalyst", encouraging cracks in glass to spread much more rapidly. According to an article in Scientific American, water causes glass to crack more easily because when a water molecule enters the crack, a reaction occurs in which a silicon-oxygen bond at the crack and an oxygen-hydrogen bond in the water are cleaved, creating two hydroxyl groups attached to silicon. As a result, the length of the crack grows by the size of one bond rupture. The water reaction reduces the energy necessary to break the silicon-oxygen bonds, thus the crack grows faster.

Theoretically, any strong material that will fill the crack and prevent moisture from entering should stop the cracking process. I don't see why a film of silicon dioxide would not work as well as resin.

Re:winshield repair? (0)

Parhelion (857262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002214)

Silicosis anyone? Silicone Dioxide is silica - the stuff they remove from regular sand to make play sand, so kids don't inhale the stuff and get lung diseases!

Re:winshield repair? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002326)

Wait.. "Play sand"

So.. Now we can't even take our kids to the freakin' beach??

Re:winshield repair? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002334)

Um... and so are your windows, and your drinking glasses, and your computer and television screens, and mirrors, and a plethora of other items in the home.

Your point? (I would assume that people would take precautions to avoid breathing the stuff as they spray.)

Re:winshield repair? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002396)

I think you're missing the point here:

REVOLUTIONARY SPRAY ON CONDOM

Just hope it doesn't shatter.

Very sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31001800)

Not sure how breathable glass is, I would limit my exposure. If its a durable surface (not prone to cracking), this could be an amazing breakthrough. I wonder what the durability is, how often between applications. Well, off to rtfa!

Re:Very sweet (1)

simcop2387 (703011) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002014)

wrong type of breathable. i believe they mean that if the surface needs to breathe (certain plastics, etc.) that the glass will let it breathe.

Re:Very sweet (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002096)

It is not referring that you can snort or sniff the substance

Breathable in relation to permeable
This allows air to pass through while being too compact to allow water drops to enter.

Too Bad (3, Funny)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001814)

Too bad "ManInTheWhiteSuit" is too long of a tag.

What a great movie.

home in 2! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002362)

"these are not the grits you are looking for..."

Re:Too Bad (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002538)

Alec Guinness was cool. His movies always seemed to be rather sad at the end, though... seems "it" never worked out. Man in the White Suit, Lavender Hill Mob, Ladykillers, and Kind Hearts and Cornets all ended rather badly for the main protagonist. Among others. :)

All glass is liquid (0)

Psychotic_Wrath (693928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001828)

Technicaly all glass is liquid. IAAC (I am a chemist)

Re:All glass is liquid (5, Informative)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001872)

Urban legend. Glass is an amorphous solid.

Re:All glass is liquid (4, Funny)

Tebriel (192168) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001924)

Apparently, the parent's parent is a _bad_ chemist.

Re:All glass is liquid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002110)

Apparently, the parent's parent is a _bad_ chemist.

Superimposed Caption: "A Less Naughty Chemist's" [ibras.dk]

"Right, who's got a boil on his [liquid glass] Semprini, then?"

Re:All glass is liquid (4, Interesting)

tehniobium (1042240) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001966)

This guy doesn't entirely agree with you:

http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Glass/glass.html

I quote:

<quote>In terms of molecular dynamics and thermodynamics it is possible to justify various different views that it is a highly viscous liquid, an amorphous solid, or simply that glass is another state of matter that is neither liquid nor solid. The difference is semantic.</quote>

Re:All glass is liquid (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002344)

By this definition isn't plastic "a highly viscous liquid" as well

Re:All glass is liquid (5, Informative)

EvanED (569694) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001914)

Wikipedia disagrees. [wikipedia.org]

In particular, the myth that glass in older houses is thicker at the bottom because it flowed definitely seems to be just that -- a myth:

If medieval glass has flowed perceptibly, then ancient Roman and Egyptian objects should have flowed proportionately more but this is not observed. Similarly, prehistoric obsidian blades should have lost their edge; this is not observed either (although obsidian may have a different viscosity from window glass). ... If glass flows at a rate that allows changes to be seen with the naked eye after centuries, then the effect should be noticeable in antique telescopes. Any slight deformation in the antique telescopic lenses would lead to a dramatic decrease in optical performance, a phenomenon that is not observed.

Re:All glass is liquid (4, Interesting)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001972)

So I'm all for moderation not being aligned with agreement, but I'm not sure how a factually incorrect post can be "Informative"...

Oh, wait, I get it... the post informs us in that now we know chemists can fall for myths just like everyone else.

(The reason old windows are thicker at the bottom is that they were built that way, for structural reasons.)

Re:All glass is liquid (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002360)

Aesthetic reasons actually, and that doesn't mean that glass doesn't creep. Just that it won't creep anywhere near as dramatically as seen in old windows in time periods as short as millions of years, which is significantly longer than the age of most buildings with windows.

Re:All glass is liquid (4, Interesting)

tholomyes (610627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002638)

Neither structural or aesthetic; glassblowers made the window panes by spinning the glass into large circles which were then cut. The glass circles were thinner towards the outer edge and installed thicker-side down for stability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass#Behavior_of_antique_glass [wikipedia.org]

Re:All glass is liquid (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002368)

The reason old windows are thicker at the bottom is that they were built that way, for structural reasons.

That's just something fat old windows say to make themselves feel better.

Re:All glass is liquid (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002392)

No, it merely demonstrates that those selected for moderation can be subject to various incorrect assumptions, biases or asshat inclinations.

Can we now get off the idea that moderation is anything but "Someone finds me interesting,informative, trollish" etc.?

Re:All glass is liquid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002054)

Technically, glass is solid. Its molecules are rigidly bound and it is a non flowing, hard material. IANAC (I am not a chemist.)

Re:All glass is liquid (2, Insightful)

iris-n (1276146) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002434)

Nice trolling.

Re:All glass is liquid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002630)

You may be a chemist, but you are certainly mistaken.

Let me be the first to say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31001840)

Let me be the first to say...

sprayed on for a durable, easy-to-clean film on almost any substance, hard or soft.

bow-chicka-wow-wow!

Re:Let me be the first to say (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002376)

Let me be the first to say...

sprayed on for a durable, easy-to-clean film on almost any substance, hard or soft.

bow-chicka-wow-wow!

I'm not sure where you were heading with this, but just because it's waterproof doesn't mean you should use it as a spray on condom.

diamond (1)

confused one (671304) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001860)

So, now, where is my liquid spray on diamond coating. That's what I'm waiting for...

Re:diamond (1)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002560)

Well, in theory it wouldn't really be that hard to do; we can already synthesise very small diamonds.

Although, from my limited understanding of the field, you'd really want the glass instead, at the 100-300 molecule level.

New? Really? (1)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001868)

I've been using a product called Knot Wax (from a company called LoPresti) for years on my airplane. It's a two part spray on process that coats the airplane in a glass shell.

I'm not so sure this is any different, or new for that matter.

Bill

Re:New? Really? (1)

e9th (652576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002032)

Well, Knot Wax is silicon free [speedmods.com] , for starters. Not sure if that makes much difference aeronautically.

Re:New? Really? (3, Informative)

reverseengineer (580922) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002300)

Products like Knot Wax are more like a plastic shell than a glass shell. The process takes two parts because first a coating of a resin is laid down (usually either a polyepoxide or polyurethane), and then an amine is applied to cross-link the resin molecules, leading to a very tough coating. The product discussed here appears to be a solution of short chains of silica, which when applied deposit actual glass on the surface. I'm curious about the strength of such a coating; there doesn't not appear to be any suggestion that the glass is bonded to the surface by anything stronger than van der Waals forces.

Silicosis? (4, Interesting)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001894)

If it's that thing of a layer, wont it be prone to breaking off and becoming airborne? Sounds like silicosis-fun-times to me.

Re:Silicosis? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002246)

Prune juice penis queef.

Re:Silicosis? (3, Insightful)

pz (113803) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002272)

If it's that thing of a layer, wont it be prone to breaking off and becoming airborne? Sounds like silicosis-fun-times to me.

Yeah. Silica-based glass is not very hard. Although this coating is reportedly flexible, I'm betting that it will be readily breached with a sharp edge, so that the example application, on food processing surfaces, at least ones that come in contact with knives, tools and containers, won't be that useful. Stainless steel works by more-or-less the same idea (a thin, hard oxide forms at the surface), except that it has the advantage that when -- not if -- the oxide layer is damaged, a new one automatically forms.

Re:Silicosis? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002456)

Cutting boards made of glass are quite common. To be fair, though, I believe they are of somewhat different composition.

Re:Silicosis? (1)

Goldsmith (561202) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002508)

first thing I thought of too... these guys are going to have a fun time with European regulators.

Breatheable? (1)

Tebriel (192168) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001912)

I always wanted waterproof lungs.

Re:Breatheable? (1)

minvaren (854254) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002168)

Heeeeeeey Aqualung....

touchscreen (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001920)

Ah now i can finally keep my touchscreen from getting greasy...

(Or does it interfere with its operation?)

Re:touchscreen (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002602)

Somehow I doubt spraying a glass coating on your glass touch screen is going to do you much good. Probably the opposite since glass touch screens are supposed to have oil repellant coatings.

Re:touchscreen (1)

Kral_Blbec (1201285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002610)

I'm surprised that it took this long for someone to bring this up. It was one of my first thoughts.

But will it get you high when you snort it? (5, Interesting)

Orga (1720130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31001936)

Inhaling finely divided crystalline silica dust in very small quantities (OSHA allows 0.1 mg/m3) over time can lead to silicosis, bronchitis or (much more rarely) cancer, as the dust becomes lodged in the lungs and continuously irritates them, reducing lung capacities (silica does not dissolve over time). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_dioxide [wikipedia.org]

Re:But will it get you high when you snort it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002114)

They mean it will allow air to penetrate to the surface that is being coated, not that humans can inhale it without harmful effect.

Re:But will it get you high when you snort it? (4, Insightful)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002294)

OP was pointing out that spraying a thin layer of a substance that is known to damage the lungs when inhaled over everything you own is a good way of ensuring said damage to your lungs.

EROSION, people. Most mountains are made of solid granite a harder substance than glass a glass shell, yet they are scoured into sand over time by the simple act of the wind blowing particulate against them. A glass shell over your counter-top is going to be silicon dust in the air in a few months of use, if it lasts that long.

Re:But will it get you high when you snort it? (1)

gumbi west (610122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002320)

Yes, but that is 0.0001 g/m3 * 1/60.0843 g/molecule * 6.02*10^23 molecues/mol = 10^18 molecules / cubic meter. at 10-30 atoms thick, and assuming a each molecule takes up about 10 pm square (is that right?) you get about 2*10^25 of atoms/meter. Wait, can that be right? I must have a bad assumption or math somewhere...

Re:But will it get you high when you snort it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002420)

But if you smoke the dust gets embedded in mucous that you then hack up. No worries!

pulmonary fibrosis & silicosis risks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31001952)

Just as asbestos is a great product *for select applications* so is "glass." IMO, this sounds like a horrible idea.
Have the inventors never heard of Silicon Fibrosis? Due to abrasion Si fibers go airborne, where they imbed in the lungs and abrade, causing eventual cancer. Go have a look at the MSDS sheets. It's a nasty way to die.

Hurrrr Durrrr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002188)

MSDS sheets.

You're one of those douchebags that says "ATM machines" and "SPG guns", aren't you?

Burn in flames.

Pulmonary Saccharosis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002280)

Don't forget the dreaded Saccharosis, also known as Sugar Lung, caused by consuming Pixy Stix too fast.

Anti-graffiti? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002002)

I wonder if this could help make graffiti removal easier. Spray this on a clean road sign, and then just wash it with water if it gets tagged. Sure could help new drivers in Los Angeles.

Re:Anti-graffiti? (2, Informative)

pz (113803) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002200)

I wonder if this could help make graffiti removal easier. Spray this on a clean road sign, and then just wash it with water if it gets tagged. Sure could help new drivers in Los Angeles.

The New York Subway system has been reportedly using teflon coating for exactly this reason for a very long time. Urban pinheads -- ah, I mean artists -- determined to make their mark despite the paint-shedding properties of teflon discovered that you can scratch the surface instead, thus creating what's called scratchiti, a horrible, far more defacing version of graffiti.

Re:Anti-graffiti? (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002380)

This could lead to graffiti competitions!

Set up some wall, complete with owner's permission, spray this product on it, have the graffiti contestants go at it. Pictures taken, scores noted, wipe it down and then the next contestant does his/her thang.

There could be sponsorships, regional championships and the ultimate Graffiti Bowl (TM)!

You've got me? Who's got you? (2, Funny)

Shabazz Rabbinowitz (103670) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002012)

If nothing sticks to it, how does it stay on?

It reminds me of the old joke: a young man comes back from his first year as a college chemistry major. His father asks him what he is working on. "We're trying to create the universal solvent."

"What's that?"

"It's a liquid that will dissolve anything."

"What're ya gonna keep it in?"

Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002208)

"What're ya gonna keep it in?"

In a magnetic field, as is done with plasma.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Interesting)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002238)

What if the universal solvent is inert from a electromagnetic standpoint?

Re:Hmmm... (3, Interesting)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002608)

It's a solvent, dissolve some iron into it :-P

OUCH! (1)

bullok (155096) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002018)

If a sheet of glass 15 to 30 atoms thick breaks, I'd expect it to be extremely hazardous to clean up. The pieces would be incredibly sharp.

Possibly Risky But Highly Useful Nonetheless (3, Informative)

resistant (221968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002030)

I saw this news item as well, albeit at PhysOrg [physorg.com] , which has linked a few interesting related articles. From the comments, it struck me that a concern is indeed the possibility that stray particles from applying this stuff might get into your lungs or on your eyes, causing all sorts of problems since it apparently binds well to organic substances. Also, one wonders what happens if the coating is degraded on food-handling surfaces. Do fragmented microparticles rip up your insides after being carried into your body within contaminated food?

Even with these concerns, of course, I'd love to test this stuff on various less risky surfaces, such as bathroom tiles and shop tools, with appropriate respiratory and eye protection. Being able to use it on a kitchen countertop would just be a welcome bonus if it turns out to be safe for that use after all. (As an aside, I think that use wouldn't breed resistant bacteria since it simply discourages any bacteria at all from growing on the protected surfaces).

Germ free lungs! (1)

mseidl (828824) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002080)

1. Just spray this in my lungs to prevent me from ever getting a cold again!
2. ???
3. Profit!!!

This Almost Sounds Familiar (1)

camperslo (704715) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002098)

This product reminds of the one years ago that could provide a thin but very hard layer for vinyl records thus preventing wear (and the noise/distortion that goes with it).

If this material doesn't come off or splinter, maybe it would be good for protecting glasses with plastic lenses?

Re:This Almost Sounds Familiar (1)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002406)

Really? If this is so, I want to buy stock in this company. Not that I disbelieve you, but I've never heard of this and it's very exciting news. Every record should come with a coat of this on it...and if the technology is there it could potentially change a lot of the music industry. The only con to a record is that it wears out. If you can give me a record for life (i.e., it gets dusty and skips around? throw it in the dishwasher), I'll pay a premium for it. And I'm sure the professional audio industry will too.

No information (4, Informative)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002108)

Anybody else notice that the article has essentially no information on what the stuff is? One thing that it isn't is "we extract molecules of SiO2, and then we add the molecules to water or ethanol," which is what the article tries to imply-- you can't just "add" molecules of silicon dioxide to water, nor to alcohol. So, just exactly what is it?

The actual press release from which this article seem to have been drawn is here [nanopool.eu] .

here is my (serious) question: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002142)

what happens when a piece of it is chipped off and put into the human body?

im not one of those ultra health nuts that walks around with a respirator (do such people actually exist?), but, i do try to avoid the use of certain types of pots and pans if i can help it (as in, those pans that have non stick teflon type surfaces breaking apart into peoples foods as they cook which, if im not mistaken, have been shown to cause cancer--- is this a wild conspiracy theory or is it as well known as it seems to be?)

either way. i dont expect that any testing of this nature will be done (seeing as how we have become so painfully backwards as a race that we would rather potentially harm humans than feed a couple of rats and dogs some tasty food with a few of these 'chips' in it).

Re:here is my (serious) question: (1)

Faerunner (1077423) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002498)

It's well known that the airborne particles (fumes?) from high-heat cooking with nonstick pans CAN kill your pet bird, given a long enough exposure (a few hours, according to some bird owners).

The link to cancer in humans is, afaik, slightly less well supported. The coatings seem to be much safer at lower cooking temperatures, and anecdotal evidence suggests that as long as they're not scratched or peeling they shed very little particulate matter. I suspect this glass-like coating is rather the same. In the tiny amounts you'd possibly ingest, it's probably relatively harmless over the course of a day or even a few years. I'd be wary of immediately using it on my countertops, but I won't begrudge restaurants who decide to spray their tables with this stuff!

There are so many things that are believed to cause cancer in this world; you really can't avoid all of them. We're gonna die one way or another; I'm all for a long and healthy life but I'll take my nonstick cookware as a trade-off: cancer risk 20 years from now, vs. 10 minutes less scrubbing pans today.

Chocolate hardening fat free coating for ice cream (2, Funny)

Orga (1720130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002160)

Gain no calories from your dessert with our secret hardening spray on topping! Disclaimer: may cause minor irritation of gums, tongue, esophagus, stomach, intestines and whatever else is left.

Re:Chocolate hardening fat free coating for ice cr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002422)

"Do not process silicon dioxide with remaining kidney."

it's not a conductor! (3, Interesting)

prgrmr (568806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002230)

Think of the fun to be had spraying this stuff on the battery terminals of ipods, cell phones and other electronic devices of those you want to annoy. It's a party in can!

Instant Whiteboard Anywhere (1)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002234)

Finally, I can make my life size cut out of Colonel Sanders white-board marker safe.

Finally, Non-nutritive food shellac (1)

PinchDuck (199974) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002236)

Somewhere, Clark Griswold is smiling.

how breakable is it? (2, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002240)

You can spray it? "They called it misted glass!"

Irving Mainway (4, Funny)

boristdog (133725) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002262)

I call it "Can o' Glass". Kids love glass, and kids love sprayin' stuff. We just give the kids what they want.

Condums in a can (0)

xmousex (661995) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002312)

i win

As the glass wears off/down (2, Insightful)

bigattichouse (527527) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002364)

I can feel my lungs beginning to itch, ahhh Silicosis [wikipedia.org] - how nice that EVERYTHING will be covered in a fine layer of silicon that *WILL* wear away and add some lovely fine powdered glass to my daily breathing.

Ouch (1)

KingPin27 (1290730) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002462)

So what happens when you get a fraction of a 30 atom thick splinter from this crap in your finger? or worse all over your body? I don't even want to imagine what would happen if the surface were to shatter or splinter.

Re:Ouch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002616)

So what happens when you get a fraction of a 30 atom thick splinter from this crap in your finger? or worse all over your body?

Death of a thousand cuts?

can't wait (1)

charliemopps11 (1606697) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002472)

I can't wait for all the hippies to start telling us this stuff causes cancer and crap. They'll ban it in Seattle, there will be protests to have restaurants put up signs if they use it, it's going to be hilarious.

old fashioned silane chemistry ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31002476)

www.gelest.com has about a gazillion diff silane compounds, if the std ones from dowcorning or degussa are good enough for you
In the presence of atmospheric moisture, silanes form silicone dioxide like networks...

Water resistant? (1)

markdavis (642305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002500)

>"The spray forms a water-resistant layer, meaning it can be cleaned using only water."

Last time I checked, that is NOT the definition of water-resistant. "Water-resistant" means just that- it resists being dissolved by or being penetrated by water. It does not mean it can be "cleaned using only water." ("Water-proof", means it can NOT be dissolved by or penetrated at all by water.) Who writes this stuff??

I, for one,.... (2, Funny)

mythunderstood (1736104) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002556)

... welcome our transparent waterproof 15 to 30 atoms thick overlords.

Clean with distilled water I assume (1)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31002644)

If you were to use tap water where I live (hard water area), you would quickly end up with a smear of limescale on the surface. So you would need to clean (or at least rinse) with distilled water.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?