# Astronomers discover planet made of diamond



## Harpo (Aug 26, 2011)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/26/us-planet-diamond-idUSTRE77O69A20110826

(Reuters) - Astronomers have spotted an exotic planet that seems to be made of diamond racing around a tiny star in our galactic backyard.
The new planet is far denser than any other known so far and consists largely of carbon. Because it is so dense, scientists calculate the carbon must be crystalline, so a large part of this strange world will effectively be diamond.
"The evolutionary history and amazing density of the planet all suggest it is comprised of carbon -- i.e. a massive diamond orbiting a neutron star every two hours in an orbit so tight it would fit inside our own Sun," said Matthew Bailes of Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne.
Lying 4,000 light years away, or around an eighth of the way toward the center of the Milky Way from the Earth, the planet is probably the remnant of a once-massive star that has lost its outer layers to the so-called pulsar star it orbits.
Pulsars are tiny, dead neutron stars that are only around 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) in diameter and spin hundreds of times a second, emitting beams of radiation.
In the case of pulsar J1719-1438, the beams regularly sweep the Earth and have been monitored by telescopes in Australia, Britain and Hawaii, allowing astronomers to detect modulations due to the gravitational pull of its unseen companion planet.
The measurements suggest the planet, which orbits its star every two hours and 10 minutes, has slightly more mass than Jupiter but is 20 times as dense, Bailes and colleagues reported in the journal Science on Thursday.
In addition to carbon, the new planet is also likely to contain oxygen, which may be more prevalent at the surface and is probably increasingly rare toward the carbon-rich center.
Its high density suggests the lighter elements of hydrogen and helium, which are the main constituents of gas giants like Jupiter, are not present.
Just what this weird diamond world is actually like close up, however, is a mystery.
"In terms of what it would look like, I don't know I could even speculate," said Ben Stappers of the University of Manchester. "I don't imagine that a picture of a very shiny object is what we're looking at here."
(Reporting by Ben Hirschler; Editing by Sophie Hares)


----------



## Metryq (Aug 26, 2011)

"Scintillating." —Spock


----------



## Parson (Aug 26, 2011)

Amazing --- Parson


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 26, 2011)

This sounds massively speculative to me. It seems the only real thing they know about this planet is its mass. They're inferring something about the size of the planet (not sure how) to work out the density. And it seems they're entirely guessing about the physical makeup of the planet. But oh well.


----------



## Stephen Palmer (Aug 26, 2011)

How many carats is that?


----------



## TheTomG (Aug 26, 2011)

Imagine if it had rings around it, kind of a role reversal heh.


----------



## DrMclony (Aug 26, 2011)

or if it was shattered by an asteroid and really formed a diamond ring!


----------



## Oskari (Aug 27, 2011)

"The measurements *suggest *the planet, which orbits its star every two  hours and 10 minutes, has slightly more mass than Jupiter but is 20  times as dense ... "

Science - thank the gods - is chiefly concerned with speculation. But this speculation is not fuelled by imagination or fantasy but by the best available data. Of course, scientific knowledge adapts to new data and further speculation.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Aug 27, 2011)

From very big diamonds to very small ones:

I've recently watched a you tube talk on nano diamonds, which are carbon atoms arranged in the diamond crystal lattice or 'cage' as they call it. 'Nano' is a word much abused: a teaspoon full of these nano diamonds would be enough to give everyone on earth two billion of them, and still have some left over ... 

EDIT: Harpo, some pulsars spin as fast as you describe, others slower. The slowest revolves once every 2.5 seconds or so. They all have a different rate of rotation, which makes them good galactic 'lighthouses' for navigation purposes.

A neuteon star (pulsar) is one that just nearly became a black hole. The electrons are compressed back into the nucleus of the atoms, to form neutrons. A teaspoon of neutron star material would weigh as much as a few billion aircraft carriers ...

LADY LARA: Carbon assumes maximum mass when the atoms are arranged in the diamond lattice. A diamond is quite a heavy stone. So it's a fair and reasonable assumption.


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 2, 2011)

Maximum density do you mean?

Anyway, I guess I need to read the actual paper to know what evidence they have, but the quotes in the OP don't give any reason for why they think it's made of carbon, or for how they have any idea of the density of the planet.


----------



## mosaix (Sep 3, 2011)

Detailed explanation in this week's New Scientist. The words used are 'extreme speculation' I seem to remember.


----------



## TheTomG (Sep 3, 2011)

I wonder when science moves beyond being science and into being art and creative writing, heh. "Extreme speculation" when taken to extremes, will cease to be science at all, as I could speculate a whole lot of stuff, and often do!


----------



## Metryq (Sep 3, 2011)

Science is a method. Fanciful speculation may be required in an attempt to model what has been observed. Models that survive testing may help us further understand the world.

However, scientists and reporters (and readers) should be conscientious about what is reported as observation, what is fact (confirmed observation), and what pure speculation.

Just because a "scientist" said it does not make it true.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 3, 2011)

Metryq said:


> Science is a method. Fanciful speculation may be required in an attempt to model what has been observed. Models that survive testing may help us further understand the world.
> 
> However, scientists and reporters (and readers) should be conscientious about what is reported as observation, what is fact (confirmed observation), and what pure speculation.
> 
> Just because a "scientist" said it does not make it true.



Still, you know, if they said they'd found a world made of graphite, or sulphuric acid, it would be: "Oh, how interesting" (as in _not_).

It's only because of the value our civilization places on diamonds that it matters to anyone. There's no particular reason a world shouldn't be made of diamond, within the reasonable possibilities of science?


----------



## TheTomG (Sep 3, 2011)

A world made of graphite would be cool! The universe's largest pencil! All we need is a world made of paper, and we'd be good to go.

And a world of sulphuric acid would be enormous fun too - Venus is kind of that way anyway isn't it, it's atmosphere is full of sulphuric acid (as well as high temperatures and great pressures)? I guess it's not all made from sulphuric acid, but heading that way.

Now for the worlds made of gold, silicon, silicone, and hot dogs.


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 3, 2011)

I had a look for the actual paper but didn't manage to find it (not that I looked for more than 5 or 10 minutes). I can't really see how they've managed to find anything other than the planet's mass though. Anyhing about its density, and particularly what its made of, must surely be highly speculative.


----------



## Vertigo (Sep 4, 2011)

They may well know its size in which case it's mean density can be calculated. One way they calculate the size I believe is by how much reduction we see in the light of the star whilst the planet is transiting it.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 4, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> I had a look for the actual paper but didn't manage to find it (not that I looked for more than 5 or 10 minutes). I can't really see how they've managed to find anything other than the planet's mass though. Anyhing about its density, and particularly what its made of, must surely be highly speculative.



Do you really look liker Laura Croft?


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 4, 2011)

Vertigo said:


> They may well know its size in which case it's mean density can be calculated. One way they calculate the size I believe is by how much reduction we see in the light of the star whilst the planet is transiting it.


 
There's no mention of that in the article though, just that they measured the wobble due to the differences in the timings of the pulses. In any case, neutron stars are so small that any planet would totally obscure its disc, so you couldn't work out its size.


Oh, and I don't know who Laura Croft is...


----------



## Metryq (Sep 4, 2011)

Vertigo said:


> They may well know its size in which case it's mean density can be calculated. One way they calculate the size I believe is by how much reduction we see in the light of the star whilst the planet is transiting it.



And suppose a Jupiter-like planet only "grazed" the star in a partial eclipse? The assumption would be that a tiny, very dense planet made transit.

Still, I seem to recall once reading a speculation that Jupiter itself had a diamond-like core under all the clouds. George Pal's 1952 _The War of the Worlds_ begins with a tour of the Solar system, illustrated by Bonestell paintings, and Jupiter's surface is described as mountains and cliffs of ice and running lava.

The world of diamond may exist, or it might be a wildly wrong best guess based on extremely limited data.


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 4, 2011)

Metryq said:


> And suppose a Jupiter-like planet only "grazed" the star in a partial eclipse? The assumption would be that a tiny, very dense planet made transit.


 
The light curve profile is different when a planet only grazes the star's disc, so it's possible to differentiate them. If the planet's disc fully passes across the star's disc then there's a nice flat part in the light curve. But like I say, this doesn't work with neutron stars anyway as they have a diameter similar to that of a city.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 4, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> The light curve profile is different when a planet only grazes the star's disc, so it's possible to differentiate them. If the planet's disc fully passes across the star's disc then there's a nice flat part in the light curve. But like I say, this doesn't work with neutron stars anyway as they have a diameter similar to that of a city.



Yes but you can only deduce the diameter of the planet, not the mass from this 'Herschel Telescope'. After this you still need to go to the Hawyhii 'solar wobble' telescope to start to determine the mass. ...


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 4, 2011)

And then decide it's made out of solid carbon of course. You know, like none of the planets in our system are.


----------



## Huttman (Sep 4, 2011)

Original quote by TheTomG:
Now for the worlds made of gold, silicon, silicone, and hot dogs.  	

Mmmm...How about mac'n'cheese? I seem to remember this one commercial...


----------



## Metryq (Sep 4, 2011)

Huttman said:


> Mmmm...How about mac'n'cheese? I seem to remember this one commercial...



Count me in! Of course, such a planet wouldn't last very long. Extremely short half-life.

And I think RJM meant Lara Croft (NSFW). For some reason, lots of people pronounce it "Laura" or "Lora."


----------



## mosaix (Sep 4, 2011)

Okay, a summary from  New Scientist, 3rd Sept, Page 9.

Pulsar detected in in December 2009.

A month later periodic variations in the pulsar's signals indicate an orbiting planet. This is rare, of the 1800 or so known pulsars only two are known to harbour planets. 

Even more astonishing: the variations in the pulsars signals reveal the planet has a mass roughly equal to Jupiter but orbiting at 600,000 kilometres. 

This distance is crucial, if the planet were the size of Jupiter its atmosphere would have been too close to to the pulsar's intense gravity and so would not have survived long enough to be detected. Therefore the team concluded that it must be roughly 40% the size of Jupiter and much more compact.

Pulsars that rotate many times a second (as this one) reach such speed by stealing matter from a companion star. As there is no such sign of a companion the team conclude that the planet is a former star that was whittled down by the pulsar. In this case, it would be mostly carbon and with the mass of Jupiter the pressure exerted by its own gravity would cause it to crystallise - most likely into diamond, like carbon inside the Earth.


----------



## TheTomG (Sep 4, 2011)

Laura Croft is the lesser-known sister of Lara Croft. Laura chose a career in accountancy, and while her stories are seldom told, I can tell you they have as much adventure in them as those of her more famous sibling! You just wouldn't believe the places accountancy can take you, and neither did Laura til she experienced it all for herself firsthand.


----------



## dianacatapang (Sep 5, 2011)

[FONT=&quot]Well, I’m just wondering what will be the next thing to happen if this is all real. Can anyone then afford to buy *diamond ring*? Is everybody will be able to wear diamonds since we know there’s a huge source of diamonds out there? Gotta discover the new planet and see if I can do the mining for my own engagement ring. Right? [/FONT]


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 5, 2011)

dianacatapang said:


> [FONT=&quot]Well, I’m just wondering what will be the next thing to happen if this is all real. Can anyone then afford to buy *diamond ring*? Is everybody will be able to wear diamonds since we know there’s a huge source of diamonds out there? Gotta discover the new planet and see if I can do the mining for my own engagement ring. Right? [/FONT]



There's a large source of (gem) diamonds already. _De Beers_ owns the industry and lets them out in controlled batches in order to keep the price up.

Non-gem diamond is called 'bort' and is used for drills and cutting blades. Diamond will scratch any other stone, but is quite brittle. Mineralogical hardness is measured by the ability of one stone to scratch another.

Did you know that diamond has the highest electrical and thermal conductivity of any known material?


MOSAIX: Thanks, that about sums it up ...


----------



## Vertigo (Sep 5, 2011)

That does clear a lot up thanks Mosaix.

RJM: diamond is actually unusual in that it is an electrical *insulator* whilst also being the best thermal *conductor* of any known *solid*. One of it's potential applications is by doping it with impurities it can be usd as a semiconductor and I believe by using artificial diamonds in this way there are a number of benefits including greater resistance to chemical and radiation damage.


----------



## Huttman (Sep 5, 2011)

RJM Corbet said:


> There's a large source of (gem) diamonds already. _De Beers_ owns the industry and lets them out in controlled batches in order to keep the price up.
> 
> Non-gem diamond is called 'bort' and is used for drills and cutting blades. Diamond will scratch any other stone, but is quite brittle. Mineralogical hardness is measured by the ability of one stone to scratch another.
> 
> Did you know that diamond has the highest electrical and thermal conductivity of any known material?



Shiny! Great info, RJM.

_'By the grace of God almighty, and the pressures of the marketplace, the human race, has civilized itself. It's a miracle.'_ - Roger Waters (of Pink Floyd fame) from his Amused to Death album. Your comment about De Beers reminded me of this incredible CD about commercialism among other things. If you like his style, I recommend taking 71 or so minutes with good headphones to absorb his....stylistic/full sounding...journey of imagination and frank look at the world. It's bloody brilliant.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 5, 2011)

Vertigo said:


> That does clear a lot up thanks Mosaix.
> 
> RJM: diamond is actually unusual in that it is an electrical *insulator* whilst also being the best thermal *conductor* of any known *solid*. One of it's potential applications is by doping it with impurities it can be usd as a semiconductor and I believe by using artificial diamonds in this way there are a number of benefits including greater resistance to chemical and radiation damage.



Hmmm ... you're right.
Sorry


----------



## chrispenycate (Sep 5, 2011)

Surely the best thermal conductor would be an electrical superconductor (the lack of resistance to movement of the electrons transports heat as efficiently as electrical impulses), and these tend to be solids.

And, if I remember the article correctly, diamond transistors operate at considerably higher temperatures (and diode voltages) than their silicon counterparts, so would be useful for control circuits where silicon would melt. If we could make a diamond CPU, though it would take more power, no need for cooling fans; ceramic encapsulation and run the chips up to dull red heat…

Might need some different solder.


----------



## LadyLara (Sep 5, 2011)

Metryq said:


> Count me in! Of course, such a planet wouldn't last very long. Extremely short half-life.
> 
> And I think RJM meant Lara Croft (NSFW). For some reason, lots of people pronounce it "Laura" or "Lora."


 
I know I was being facetious  but the clue to how to spell it is in my username 

Incidentally, you'd have to work in a very tame place for that link to be NSF it...


----------



## Vertigo (Sep 5, 2011)

Diamond transistors can indeed take a lot more power and one of their proposed uses is for high power systems. As for thermal and eletrical conductivity; I took my info from this quote:



> Unlike most electrical insulators, pure diamond is a good conductor of heat because of the strong covalent bonding within the crystal. The thermal conductivity of pure diamond is the highest of any known solid. Single crystals of synthetic diamond enriched in 12C (99.9%) have the highest thermal conductivity of any material, 30 W/cm·K at room temperature, 7.5 times higher than copper. Natural diamond's conductivity is reduced by 1.1 % by the 13C naturally present, which acts as an inhomogeneity in the lattice.


 
From this Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond

I don't pretend to understand it all, in fact I was quite surised that pure carbon could be an electrical insulator but I guess the compact crystal does not allow much in the way of free electrons?


----------



## Metryq (Sep 5, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> Incidentally, you'd have to work in a very tame place for that link to be NSF it...



Oh, I laughed myself silly the first time I read the CGIWN site (I was not at work, though), but some offices are "PC" with a vengeance—people just looking for something to get offended over.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Sep 5, 2011)

Vertigo said:


> ... I don't pretend to understand it all, in fact I was quite surised that pure carbon could be an electrical insulator but I guess the compact crystal does not allow much in the way of free electrons?



Not too sure.
Glass is a very good electrical insulator because it is amorphous, yet solid. That's why they use porcelain insulators on high voltage pylons. Porcelain is devitrified glass, which means it won't 'melt'. But it's also a good thermal insulator, as one would expect.

Silver conducts electricity better than copper, but is too expensive.
After copper comes zinc ...


----------

