Unique characteristics in MMD

[Athena10X]

Some synthetic diamond producers are exceptional. There is one HPHT producer who has spared no expense to eliminate nitrogen; to the insane degree that experts declare certain of their output “C or B” in color (meaning higher than D). I’ve seen this and it’s absolutely true. The material has a subtle blue undertone but is exceptional in its whiteness. Very special.

@John Pollard, are you able to disclose who this very special manufacturer is and/or which retailer BM/online retailers carries their diamonds? I’d like to help direct my friends who are keen on MMD to the best available. Based on everything I’ve read so far I’m leaning towards HPHT. Thank you!

 

[John P]

There's a big difference between the diamond on the left and the diamond on the right. The right ones almost look cloudy compared to the left which looks crystal clear and just slightly blue on the tip.

The cloudy part might be a fingerprint (sorry). Otherwise, you described it with perfect accuracy. Exceptionally clear with hint of blue on the left.

Cool! Thank you for posting the pic. I think I can see a slight difference - camera settings and monitor settings always do their best to sabotage us! Do we know if the 'D+' diamond has any nitrogen or boron or vacancies in the structure? I guess I'm wondering what colour (if any) a '100% pure' diamond, with a perfect structure and nothing but carbon in it, would be!

Transparent glass, but with diamond’s RI. That's the goal for a few, actually (I’ll come back to that). And there’s no doubt that the script has been flipped on Type IIa natural diamonds. As an example, my company produced this Golconda a while back. Sent it in. Waited for results. Waited. Waited. Finally the email came. Hey folks, what was the hold up? They said: “We had an extremely hard time disqualifying this one as laboratory-grown and confirming it as natural.”

I'm happy that my questions aren't all totally annoying lol This might be another daft one, though... ... but would it be possible to swap the process round and apply HPHT treatment after blocking, girdling and initial polishing, if it meant that those stages were physically less demanding with CVD-alone MMD rough? Leaving final polishing to be done after HPHT? (I know we're talking High Pressure High Temperature, but is the High Pressure bit created by the growing machines actually *touching* the MMD rough? Or is it a similar volume chamber to CVD-rough creation and the atmospheric pressure increased substantially? If the latter, it would seem that swapping the stages around as suggested would not be impossible??)

I learn when people ask questions so I never consider them annoying. HPHT is physical pressure. I don’t think it would be possible to introduce a standard polished shape into a press without risk of it cleaving. The physical pressure applied is so immense that GIA has compared it to what you’d experience “if you balanced a jumbo jet on the tip of your finger.”

I want one for the technical achievement and coolness. lol

I’m 100% nerd-motivated by that as well.

 

[John P]

@John Pollard Thank your for sharing this information. Are you allowed to disclose the company that makes these better than D lab diamonds?

I’m prevented by NDA. But see my reply to @Athena10X below.

And wouldn't one buy a moissanite if lab diamonds had a double refractive index or a higher refractive index compared to mined diamonds?

I think part of what makes this so interesting is that we’re exploring new territory.

Nature never formed diamonds with metal catalysts. HPHT does and voila’, we have inclusions never seen before. Nature never formed diamonds in vertical layers. CVD does and voila’, we have visual gradations never seen before. It's not lower or higher RI, nor a traditional birefringence.

More discussion on this page.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...en-natural-and-lab-grown.249513/#post-4561705

The gradations are also different strengths, which I agree is directly attributable to QC in equipment, source materials and rate of growth.

@John Pollard, are you able to disclose who this very special manufacturer is and/or which retailer BM/online retailers carries their diamonds? I’d like to help direct my friends who are keen on MMD to the best available. Based on everything I’ve read so far I’m leaning towards HPHT. Thank you!

I would normally do so but, as mentioned to @Lessics, there’s a NDA in place. Let me check if ok to provide retailer info.

 

[John P]

I guess I'm wondering what colour (if any) a '100% pure' diamond, with a perfect structure and nothing but carbon in it, would be!

Winner. When it comes to the most advanced growers you just asked a key question. Mentioned before, but perhaps appropriate here too.

The end-game for certain synthetic diamond producers was never jewelry applications. Our shiny world is just a convenient means to another end. The most innovative and aggressive are focused on technological, medical and even military applications. Think D Flawless medical lenses, chips and quantum entanglement.

25% of synthetic output already goes toward electronics. You can check out some of the medical here. But this crazy Star Trek quantum entanglement stuff has the most insanely cool potential. I'm a lover, not a fighter, but the quantum entanglement basics and Schrödinger's cat paradox it manifests suggests the possibility of coded military communications at a transcendent level.

All to say: Adornment synthetics are very cool. But certain producers are focused on achieving trillion-dollar contracts with the likes of Apple, Pfizer, Raytheon or possibly entire nations, depending on what lies ahead.

 

[OoohShiny]

I really have to go to bed now it's 1am but all I will say before crashing out is that my neurons are tingling with excitement at how we can discuss and witness development of cutting edge stuff that also will be coooool lol

Thank you for your detailed and informative replies, Sir Pollard!

 

[OoohShiny]

Just to come back to the earlier posts now I've had some sleep quantum mechanics stuff makes my brain hurt... lol

I think I am too easily distracted by the shiny things to think of such strategic uses for diamonds as military applications!

 

[yssie]

@MrsChemist two observations from a biengineer - with a lowly masters

I'm normally a lurker in the forums because I like seeing other people's shiny jewelry, but as a chemist with a PhD, I feel the need to question this and whether there is misrepresentation, and what exactly they mean by "stria".

The way carbon crystallized depends on whether you're getting pencil graphite or a diamond. That means that in order for a diamond to form, carbon would need to grow in a cubic crystalline shape. I am unclear what the vendor is trying to get at when they say the layers of stria are different, because if carbon is NOT forming cubic crystalline structures, you would obviously not be getting a diamond. Now, with the imperfections seen in diamonds, that can be due to the fact that the diamond crystal lattice is not completely continuous through the entire stone, but I have no clue how this leads to a completely different stria when at the most basic form, diamonds are a carbon cubic crystal lattice structure.

Material that’s formed in different ways can and does have different properties. The “stria” that @John Pollard talks about in his article don’t reflect changes to diamond’s fundamental crystalline structure - they’re artifacts of the fact that CVD is quite literally depositing layers upon layers of diamond material... And it turns out that compounding layers of diamond deposit to form a single stone creates yield that looks and behaves slightly differently from one that was crystallized through force of temperature and pressure (naturally or in a lab).

This isn’t unique to diamond: Additive manufacturing of metals (similar idea of rapid deposition, albeit not identical due to binding agents) have strengths and weaknesses compared to traditional methods. Here in the jewellery world there is endless debate on pros and cons of casting and hand-forging settings - because the method of construction has real-world impact on product characteristics.

Hubs was also happy I decided to go with the lab instead of mined since we are both scientists and are supporting the scientific industry.

I’m a scientist too, but I prefer to think of myself a humanitarian first and foremost. From that perspective expansion of lab-grown diamonds raises a number of questions - what is its ecological impact, compared to mining of natural diamonds? what is its impact on Kimberley-compliant ethics-conscious countries and territories whose economic infrastructure is upheld by the diamond mining industry? I don’t have answers.

As @Matthewgolf34 observed earlier it’s expected that different consumers will have differing priorities. The author of this article works for a company that has been exploring - and honing - the subtleties of light return in RBs for an awfully long time - maybe longer than any other vendor on this board. “Statistically significant but not relevant in real life” is a subjective judgment call and CBI is known for taking a proactive stance on coercing practicality from nuance. CBI is also a company that refuses to use rough from certain parts of the world for a number of reasons - quality control, social concerns, ecological concerns. They buy it by the lot just like everyone else, and if the rough ain’t up to snuff - well, consistency of brand trumps immediacy of dollar loss… And yes, they’ve proven themselves to be more finicky about their sources than most vendors, including PS vendors. I've already complained about this article to John, it doesn't tell you anything about why it's such a big deal. Turns out it's a really bl**dy big deal.
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/blog/blog-article/41

Synthetic corundum has been around for a very long time. And origin remains important to enough people to sustain a healthy market for natural sapphire and ruby, and those who are willing to pay for precision cutting of top-quality material (they’re generally going to be bigger spenders) aren’t going to be any more tolerant of reduction in stone quality due to lab growth or treatment than they are of natural formations. For those who want the lowest price for a stone that meets their threshold minimums for various characteristics, the reality is that most of those characteristics are somewhat fluid and “value for money” is entirely contextual; some of these people will demand “natural origin” as one of their minimum thresholds, some won’t, but all will willingly (or unwillingly) concede that natural material is more desirable. We’re all human.

 

[whitewave]

@yssie you’re breathtaking

(Keanu fans will recognize)



https://tenor.com/view/keanu-reeves-breathtaking-meme-funny-gif-14329059

 

[OoohShiny]

Winner. When it comes to the most advanced growers you just asked a key question. Mentioned before, but perhaps appropriate here too.

The end-game for certain synthetic diamond producers was never jewelry applications. Our shiny world is just a convenient means to another end. The most innovative and aggressive are focused on technological, medical and even military applications. Think D Flawless medical lenses, chips and quantum entanglement.

25% of synthetic output already goes toward electronics. You can check out some of the medical here. But this crazy Star Trek quantum entanglement stuff has the most insanely cool potential. I'm a lover, not a fighter, but the quantum entanglement basics and Schrödinger's cat paradox it manifests suggests the possibility of coded military communications at a transcendent level.

All to say: Adornment synthetics are very cool. But certain producers are focused on achieving trillion-dollar contracts with the likes of Apple, Pfizer, Raytheon or possibly entire nations, depending on what lies ahead.

Even when it's explained...:
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/blog/blog-article/27/quantum-diamonds-.htm
... I'm not sure I understand

 

[MrsChemist]

And it turns out that compounding layers of diamond deposit to form a single stone creates yield that looks and behaves slightly differently from one that was crystallized through force of temperature and pressure (naturally or in a lab)

The first thing I always think about when reading comparative data is whether the diamonds have similar cuts, angles, table depth, etc, all of which can factor into the optics. It's pretty well documented that the cut of a diamond is what leads to how sparkly one views the stone, and even between mined diamonds, the optics is different. Optical properties between diamonds are different depending on the cut, and even mined "ideal" cut diamonds look different from each other. I guess I'm curious as to how well they controlled the experimental conditions. :D

Through some light research, I'm now curious as to whether these CVD diamonds which have a different stria pattern can be cut such that they form similar stria as HPHT or mined diamonds? I don't know anything about diamond cutting, but I'm wondering why this stria makes a difference when diamond are cut into their various shapes? Can you not just cut the diamond rough such that the stria patterns are similar to a HPHT condition (mined or lab grown)?

[QUOTE="yssie, post: 4589266, member: 40491"][USER=108052]
For those who want the lowest price for a stone that meets their threshold minimums for various characteristics, the reality is that most of those characteristics are somewhat fluid and “value for money” is entirely contextual; some of these people will demand “natural origin” as one of their minimum thresholds, some won’t, but all will willingly (or unwillingly) concede that natural material [I]is [/I]more [I]desirable[/I]. We’re all human.[/QUOTE]

I definitely agree with this point, as if you look at the price between natural and lab made stones, natural goes for a much higher cost. Whether that cost is worth it to a person is person dependent. At the end of the day, most humans make choices based on emotion, as iterated by many psych and business professors and general observations. =)2 I always tell people buy what you want the first time around because you're just going to be pining for what you want and waste time/resources settling, just to end up where you originally wanted at the end of the day.[/user]

 

[MrsChemist]

Even when it's explained...:
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/blog/blog-article/27/quantum-diamonds-.htm
... I'm not sure I understand

You mean to tell me that not everyone understands quantum mechanics???

Jokes aside, is there a research paper I can read on this?? This seems really interesting. Basically, diamond is made of carbon crystal lattice structure, and what the image is showing is that they are replacing one of the carbon atoms with silicon atom, so they call it a silicon vacancy. I think that's what the V in the image is. The pictures confused me at first because there is a metal with the atomic symbol V, so I was like "why is vanadium in the crystal lattice" for a minute, but I think it was to illustrate where the silicon was.

 

[John P]

QE is a sidebar, but a fun one.

For casual readers: Quantum-entanglement occurs when the quantum-state of a pair (or more) of particles is caused to remain the same, even when they're separated. As a clumsy example, if you shot a pair of entangled-photons in opposite directions and acted to make one spin or swerve - the other would instantly spin or swerve the opposite direction. The key word is instantly. It defies classical physics.

In theory, if properly exploited, this implies the potential for instant-communication beyond any third party's ability to detect or intercept. On a larger scale it implies instant-communication with others light-years distant (akin to the 'subspace radio' concept on Star Trek).

On an even higher level it opens doors for teleportation. Now, unlike Star Trek this would not be "beaming" someone across space. It would be information transfer, not matter transfer.

You mean to tell me that not everyone understands quantum mechanics??? Jokes aside, is there a research paper I can read on this?? This seems really interesting. Basically, diamond is made of carbon crystal lattice structure, and what the image is showing is that they are replacing one of the carbon atoms with silicon atom, so they call it a silicon vacancy. I think that's what the V in the image is. The pictures confused me at first because there is a metal with the atomic symbol V, so I was like "why is vanadium in the crystal lattice" for a minute, but I think it was to illustrate where the silicon was.

I'm pretty sure that's spot-on.

Meanwhile: I found the below super interesting to read.

Entangling Macroscopic Diamonds (2011)
I've attached the PDF to this post. Downloadable at the bottom.

Teleporting an unknown quantum state (this is a basis from 1993)
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1895

Done with atoms in different vacuum chambers (2009)
https://scienceblogs.com/principles/2009/07/07/entanglement-by-accident

And this one made the rounds loudly, you have probably seen it before (2017)
https://www.sciencealert.com/physicists-just-quantum-entangled-photons-between-earth-and-space

NIST physicists actually teleported a computer circuit instruction (May 2019)
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190530141539.htm

Bonus article... The DoE just awarded a $400K grant to these marvelous super-nerds.

"Physics don't go round here, Kansas law dog" - Ike Gluon said to Quark Holliday.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-04/uok-reb043019.php

"Yeah I heard ya the first time, Ike..."
.

 

[OoohShiny]

Awesome reply as always, good sir

I'm going to have to make my brain hurt with those articles tomorrow

QE is a sidebar, but a fun one.

For casual readers: Quantum-entanglement occurs when the quantum-state of a pair (or more) of particles is caused to remain the same, even when they're separated. As a clumsy example, if you shot a pair of entangled-photons in opposite directions and acted to make one spin or swerve - the other would instantly spin or swerve the opposite direction. The key word is instantly. It defies classical physics.

In theory, if properly exploited, this implies the potential for instant-communication beyond any third party's ability to detect or intercept. On a larger scale it implies instant-communication with others light-years distant (akin to the 'subspace radio' concept on Star Trek).

On an even higher level it opens doors for teleportation. Now, unlike Star Trek this would not be "beaming" someone across space. It would be information transfer, not matter transfer.

I was lucky enough to go to one of the recent Brian Cox Live shows, in which he discussed our 'light cones' and how we are bound by them (i.e. we can't teleport because we are bound by the speed of light).

What I wanted to ask (but couldn't) was whether things like this that are connected in some weird way (but where said things are so far apart as to have one of them outside a given light cone) effectively mean that time travel (via teleportation?) is possible...?!

 

[John P]

What I wanted to ask (but couldn't) was whether things like this that are connected in some weird way (but where said things are so far apart as to have one of them outside a given light cone) effectively mean that time travel (via teleportation?) is possible...?!

The recent Avengers Engame movie (spoiler alert) uses 'quantum realm' #movielogic to #moviesplain time dilation and time travel. I mention that because of some brilliant script-writing: When the possibility is first raised to Tony Stark he states “Quantum fluctuation messes with the Planck scale, which then triggers the Deutsch Proposition. Can we agree on that?”

And, in fact, David Deutsch penned a landmark paper nearly 30 years ago which would suggest that most of Endgame's movie plot is rubbish. I thought it was clever (and a respectful nod) of the writers to acknowledge Deutsch...right before they checked him into the boards and skated on by.
http://thelifeofpsi.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Deutsch-1991.pdf

Of course, the Many Worlds Theory may have something to say about all of this stuff. Brought to mainstream sci-fi and fantasy fans for decades by authors of speculative novels (Michael Moorcock is a great example) the concept of a 'multiverse' would live in the so-called 'quantum realm.'

 

[Tonks]

I can't tell you much about stria patterns (???), but I did recently buy a lab diamond from Caysie. I had always wanted to try a big rose cut, buuuuut didn't really want to pay mined diamond prices for a big rosie because I didn't know for sure if I would like it. So I jumped on it when she sold her personal collection Spring Gulch halo with a 1.3 lab rosie. It's a CVD diamond, 1.3 E and the clarity is VS but I'm a bad PSer and not only haven't done a SMTB, but can't remember more specifically what flavor of VS.

It is absolutely gorgeous. I can link you to a couple of her Instagram posts of this ring, and then some of my photos. I haven't seen mined rosies in person, but I can't imagine they would look much different or better than this. For me, this particular specialty cut was a great time to try a lab stone, and I honestly love it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bvm9Q-GHsz_/
Video

https://www.instagram.com/p/BxxsoYAnf5l/

 

[Tonks]

Additional photos. This stone has rainbows.

 

[MrsChemist]

I've attached the PDF to this post. Downloadable at the bottom.

Teleporting an unknown quantum state (this is a basis from 1993)
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1895

Done with atoms in different vacuum chambers (2009)
https://scienceblogs.com/principles/2009/07/07/entanglement-by-accident

And this one made the rounds loudly, you have probably seen it before (2017)
https://www.sciencealert.com/physicists-just-quantum-entangled-photons-between-earth-and-space

NIST physicists actually teleported a computer circuit instruction (May 2019)
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190530141539.htm

Bonus article... The DoE just awarded a $400K grant to these marvelous super-nerds.

"Physics don't go round here, Kansas law dog" - Ike Gluon said to Quark Holliday.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-04/uok-reb043019.php

"Yeah I heard ya the first time, Ike..."
.

Thanks for attaching the articles! The super nerdy scientist in me is looking forward to reading the articles after work.

Additional photos. This stone has rainbows.

Your ring is GORGEOUS!!! I have been looking into getting a right handed rose cut diamond ring. Did you buy the ring through Caysie's Etsy store?

 

[Tonks]

Thanks for attaching the articles! The super nerdy scientist in me is looking forward to reading the articles after work.



Your ring is GORGEOUS!!! I have been looking into getting a right handed rose cut diamond ring. Did you buy the ring through Caysie's Etsy store?

Thank you so much! No, it was not in Caysie’s Etsy store. I keep an eye on Loupe Troope, and I saw it there. I am not kidding you when I say I texted Caysie while I was sitting in the Chick-Fil-A drive through to hold it for me. And lucky me, she posted her Sophia band as well, so I was able to snag both. If you are interested in one, reach out to her. I am sure she could source one for you.

I’ve actually been wearing it as an alternate e-ring. I like it so much that my original is currently at the bank. (We are doing renovations and I put everything at the bank that I’m not wearing). I was a bit surprised by that choice, but I love it for summer. It’s super easy to wear, and absolutely mesmerizing. I do not catch myself thinking about the fact that it’s a lab diamond. I do catch myself thinking about the fact that it has amazing light play and that it is so different.

It is probably not what I would want for an only e-ring (rose cuts are soooo different), but I love love love it as an alternate. I will probably keep my main e-ring as a mined diamond even if I upgrade, but I love the idea of experimenting with alternate cuts in lab stones—IF the cuts are spectacular. Forgot to add earlier—Caysie was involved with the cutting of this stone, so it has a fantastic cut.

 

[sunsand]

I’m prevented by NDA. But see my reply to @Athena10X below.


I think part of what makes this so interesting is that we’re exploring new territory.

Nature never formed diamonds with metal catalysts. HPHT does and voila’, we have inclusions never seen before. Nature never formed diamonds in vertical layers. CVD does and voila’, we have visual gradations never seen before. It's not lower or higher RI, nor a traditional birefringence.

More discussion on this page.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...en-natural-and-lab-grown.249513/#post-4561705

The gradations are also different strengths, which I agree is directly attributable to QC in equipment, source materials and rate of growth.


I would normally do so but, as mentioned to @Lessics, there’s a NDA in place. Let me check if ok to provide retailer info.

Hi John, I would very much appreciate that information as well if and when you receive approval to do so. Thanks very much.