Recent comments in /f/askscience

girnigoe t1_j6bdafy wrote

I wanted to say something similar but wondered… COULD you actually do a corundum-to-blue-sapphire or quartz-to-amethyst gradient, by growing the gem in a lab & gradually adding the doping (“dirty”) element?

I see your edit & yeah this isn’t melting, but does OP really care about the specific process!?

and a lab-grown gem would still be…clear & sparkly like a gemstone. the resin suggestions kill the whole thing imo

edit: similar to u/highfructosetrashjuice’s comment in the thread.

2

girnigoe t1_j6bbxui wrote

yes! acidity is also the reason that botulism isn’t SO likely in fruit jams, but more likely to be a problem in canned meat.

what i didn’t understand about infant botulism for a long time is: for adults the SPORES aren’t a problem, because they die in your gut. the toxins left over that the bacteria created (pooped out?) while living in the nonacidic canned food is what makes us very sick. for BABIES the problem is the spores can literally create more bacteria in their tummies / intestines, & hang out there eating food & making toxin

49

kcasper t1_j6bbm44 wrote

>Loading gem powder instead of a dye into resin? Not cheap

The only really expensive part here is acquiring the gem powder. The rest is pouring it in a mold, letting it cure, and then polishing it into a specific detail. Simple round rings are terribly easy to make. Longevity is an issue as you need to know the correct formula to keep the outer layer from flaking or peeling apart.

1

copperpoint t1_j6bashd wrote

Ok random slightly relevant bit of info. If you're trying to melt amethyst, as you heat it it will turn into citrine. This happens long before it melts and if you stop the process partway through you get ametrine, which is a solid crystal that is part amethyst and part citrine. You could carve that into a ring and it would look cool but probably be incredibly brittle.

EDIT: I know they want sapphire but they can be yellow so it might have the look they want. And another hindrance to OPs idea is the fact that a gem quality sapphire large enough to be carved into a ring would be fairly expensive.

1

azuth89 t1_j6b9qq4 wrote

Number of inputs vs lack of ethical control scenarios + difficulty due to time basically.

If, for example, you wanted to answer this question a logical experiment might be to put a bunch of kids in a controlled setting at birth, possibly their mothers if prenatal deficiency is part of the theory, and then raise them for a couple decades with a deficiency in a specific vitamin and see if they have higher rates than the population at large. Potentially do this a number of times to isolate different vitamins, levels of deficiency, timing and so on.

Sound like something you would want to do?

But we can't. So we have to wait for a statistically significant number of people to get diagnosed, hope they have decent medical records and comb through those records for a common thread which stands out from all other possible environmental and genetic influences as a stronger predictor, and then do further analysis to make sure it remains predictive. Maybe start testing a large population in a longitudinal study to see if people with that behavior, deficiency, whatever eventually get diagnosed. Of course, if it IS a vitamin deficiency that wasnt previously tested you have to wrestle with the ethics of whether to address the deficiency or let it go and see what happen when you find it.

Tldr; Anything around brain development and mental health has an astronomical number of variables and few if any ethical ways to create a controlled experiment to start isolating them. Because development takes a couple of decades at least the sheer time and effort involved is also a significant barrier. So instead these studies are often meta-analysis of scattered and inconsistent data generated from other studies.

126