Nobel Prize in Physics - Graphene

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
It's a few days old, but I'd like to call attention to the 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded to Geim and Novoselov for their discovery of graphene.

I spent several years doing research on graphene and read many of their papers. It's a well-deserved prize for sure as it really does seem like graphene will make its way into every-day devices and have all sorts of practical applications. That, and it's just plain cool.

The odd thing about this prize though is that it came so soon. This work was done in 2004, and for a physics prize to be granted after just 6 years is almost unheard of lately. Typically winners get their recognition for work done 20 or more years ago, mainly to ensure that their advances are recognized, verified, and proven. I guess this just goes to show how important graphene actually is.

edit: Here is a nice sort of summary paper written by Geim and Novoselov from 2007 which explains what graphene is and what it is good for. It's a nice article because it starts off pretty basic and gets more complicated the farther you read, so just stop when it doesn't make sense anymore. This way, there's enough technical stuff for everyone.
 
Last edited:

McWatt

Senior member
Feb 25, 2010
405
0
71
My favorite two parts of the prize are the mere six year wait and the use of scotch tape to strip graphene off of graphite. It's potentially more useful than CNTs and much cheaper to produce.

I'm amused at the lack of replies to your thread. Maybe if you used a title like "Nobel Prize in Physics - No thanks to [pick one: Obama or Palin]" you'd get more bites.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I agree with you, it's a good choice. I just couldn't find much to say about it.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
My favorite two parts of the prize are the mere six year wait and the use of scotch tape to strip graphene off of graphite. It's potentially more useful than CNTs and much cheaper to produce.

I'm amused at the lack of replies to your thread. Maybe if you used a title like "Nobel Prize in Physics - No thanks to [pick one: Obama or Palin]" you'd get more bites.

Well it's not actually cheaper to produce that way. Sure, you can get a single flake that's maybe 10 square microns in size, but you have to throw away a lot of other chips and that's a lot of work for a tiny flake. To be useful, we have to learn to grow a single layer sheet to cover an entire wafer. We're actually not doing too badly in that respect if we use copper films and semi-standard chemical vapour deposition of methane. Of course the costs go up a bit, but it's still quite cheap considering what you get out of it.

I've spent many many hours peeling tape with graphite all over it and sticking it to wafers. It's kinda cool (actually scotch tape isn't the best for it... too much glue).
 

daishi5

Golden Member
Feb 17, 2005
1,196
0
76
Well it's not actually cheaper to produce that way. Sure, you can get a single flake that's maybe 10 square microns in size, but you have to throw away a lot of other chips and that's a lot of work for a tiny flake. To be useful, we have to learn to grow a single layer sheet to cover an entire wafer. We're actually not doing too badly in that respect if we use copper films and semi-standard chemical vapour deposition of methane. Of course the costs go up a bit, but it's still quite cheap considering what you get out of it.

I've spent many many hours peeling tape with graphite all over it and sticking it to wafers. It's kinda cool (actually scotch tape isn't the best for it... too much glue).

Scotch tape may not be the best, but it is still a good story that they got a noble prize with what is basically a pencil lead and scotch tape.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Only science would have the balls to give nobel prize for toxic materials . Its as bad as giving Obama peace award. out with green and in with more toxic waste. Progress! I worked many years in food industry this stuff is bad bad shit. Graphite. Yet we still give number 2 leaded pencils for children to put in mouth . The irony of progress .
 
Last edited:
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Only science would have the balls to give nobel prize for toxic materials . Its as bad as giving Obama peace award. out with green and in with more toxic waste. Progress! I worked many years in food industry this stuff is bad bad shit. Graphite. Yet we still give number 2 leaded pencils for children to put in mouth . The irony of progress .
Lead pencils don't actually contain any lead. Nor is graphite considered "bad shit":

http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC33124

Besides that, graphite is made of carbon and, guess what, we are carbon-based life forms. So your god made us out of toxic stuff?
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Only science would have the balls to give nobel prize for toxic materials . Its as bad as giving Obama peace award. out with green and in with more toxic waste. Progress! I worked many years in food industry this stuff is bad bad shit. Graphite. Yet we still give number 2 leaded pencils for children to put in mouth . The irony of progress .

Throw away your computer, cell phone, car, and burn your house down. They all contain "toxic" materials.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
What page in the report linked does it describe why this is important to me. (average joe)

No one yet knows why it will be important to you, the average Joe. However - graphene has very unique and variable properties. Assuming it can one day be produced economically, almost anything with unique properties will serve in a variety of ways.
 

IceBergSLiM

Lifer
Jul 11, 2000
29,932
3
81
No one yet knows why it will be important to you, the average Joe. However - graphene has very unique and variable properties. Assuming it can one day be produced economically, almost anything with unique properties will serve in a variety of ways.

I'll reserve my enthusiasm in that case.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
Scotch tape may not be the best, but it is still a good story that they got a noble prize with what is basically a pencil lead and scotch tape.

Unfortunately pencil lead is mostly clay with some graphite mixed in. Charcoal is a bit better of a proxy. Scotch tape is definitely used to make graphene, but the graphite sources are generally mined natural graphite.

But yes, it's cool that you can make the stuff at home.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Lead pencils don't actually contain any lead. Nor is graphite considered "bad shit":

http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC33124

Besides that, graphite is made of carbon and, guess what, we are carbon-based life forms. So your god made us out of toxic stuff?

So your saying graphite lubs. are alright to use in food industry . Would you like to place a wager on that?

http://books.google.com/books?id=1w...7;20Lubricants in food industry toxic&f=false

You can believe what you want . Just as I am sure you believe that fluoridated drinking water is just fine and none toxic. Next you will say mercury in small parts is Ok also . Baa Baa the sheep are in ruin. The north american indians are the only ones who got it right and we basicly destroyed the people and their land. So your shit ass life appears to be better for it . Live in balance with mother nature or DIE,
 
Last edited:

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
Only science would have the balls to give nobel prize for toxic materials . Its as bad as giving Obama peace award. out with green and in with more toxic waste. Progress! I worked many years in food industry this stuff is bad bad shit. Graphite. Yet we still give number 2 leaded pencils for children to put in mouth . The irony of progress .

It's just pure carbon. There's nothing toxic about it at all.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
What page in the report linked does it describe why this is important to me. (average joe)

It doesn't say what specific devices it could be used in, but I'll give you a few examples.

1. Flexible electronics. Graphene can stretch and can be stuck to flexible substrates and patterned into electronic gizmos. Imagine credit cards you can roll up, or a watch you can stick to your skin. Then imagine way cooler stuff.

2. Transparent flexible electrodes. Goodbye Indium-Tin-Oxide. Hello all sorts of cool displays on glass etc.

3. Better electronics. Graphene can conduct way better than copper, can be patterned more precisely than silicon, and can dissipate more energy per unit area than the surface of the sun.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I'll reserve my enthusiasm in that case.

But the Nobel Prizes (the real ones, not the Peace one) are always for break-throughs like this, not for practical purposes or products. A killer cell phone or a new type of insulation are engineering feats; Nobel Prize-winning discoveries are for amazing science, the things that make new classes of engineered products possible. Think of radiation imaging or the field effect transistor. Those discoveries didn't immediately change life at all, yet those technologies and what flowed from them (in both new science and actual products) literally transformed our world into something that would be practically unrecognizable when they were discovered. Graphene promises the same transformative effects. Even if graphene never becomes a practical material for consumer products, its unique properties have already spawned a revolution in what we know and how we think about materials science, quantum effects, and constructing 3D matrices to obtain desired properties.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Only science would have the balls to give nobel prize for toxic materials . Its as bad as giving Obama peace award. out with green and in with more toxic waste. Progress! I worked many years in food industry this stuff is bad bad shit. Graphite. Yet we still give number 2 leaded pencils for children to put in mouth . The irony of progress .
So your saying graphite lubs. are alright to use in food industry . Would you like to place a wager on that?
You can believe what you want . Just as I am sure you believe that fluoridated drinking water is just fine and none toxic. Next you will say mercury in small parts is Ok also . Baa Baa the sheep are in ruin. The north american indians are the only ones who got it right and we basicly destroyed the people and their land. So your shit ass life appears to be better for it . Live in balance with mother nature or DIE,
Forgive him, Lord, for he knows not what he posts...
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
To address the ninja edit:

You can believe what you want . Just as I am sure you believe that fluoridated drinking water is just fine and none toxic. Next you will say mercury in small parts is Ok also . Baa Baa the sheep are in ruin. The north american indians are the only ones who got it right and we basicly destroyed the people and their land. So your shit ass life appears to be better for it . Live in balance with mother nature or DIE,
I don't know what's worse; all the shit that's bad for you in this world or all the busybody tools incessantly preaching about what's bad for you and how we're all gonna die.

After 51 years I do know which of those two are a whole fuckload more annoying.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Why would Lord forgive me for that which the Lord has commanded me to do . There are few like minded people such as my self . I enjoy my minority status. Time has run out we shall shortly see who stands with Gods plan and who stands against it . Of course I am annoying . Even more so than ever because of New years eve , And its going to get even better , I will become not so annoying but a thorn that can't be removed.
 
Last edited:

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
Honestly, this sounds like yet ANOTHER one of these overhyped chemical-mechanical things that won't get anywhere. Remember buckyballs?


Still waiting for the technological revolution that every breakthrough of the last decade has been purported to bring.


And the reporting makes nonsensical claims.... NPR said it can support the weight of a car on top of a pencil, or something. What does that even mean??
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Honestly, this sounds like yet ANOTHER one of these overhyped chemical-mechanical things that won't get anywhere. Remember buckyballs?


Still waiting for the technological revolution that every breakthrough of the last decade has been purported to bring.


And the reporting makes nonsensical claims.... NPR said it can support the weight of a car on top of a pencil, or something. What does that even mean??

Well - it's a very small car. Or a very big pencil.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Honestly, this sounds like yet ANOTHER one of these overhyped chemical-mechanical things that won't get anywhere. Remember buckyballs?


Still waiting for the technological revolution that every breakthrough of the last decade has been purported to bring.


And the reporting makes nonsensical claims.... NPR said it can support the weight of a car on top of a pencil, or something. What does that even mean??
Buckyballs are a preliminary form of carbon nanotubes which are used in applications ranging from wind turbine blades, to electronics, to the medical and chemical industries. As manufacturing methods continue to become more efficient and cost effective we will see their use become even more widespread. New technologies take time to adopt and adapt.