Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2017/11/06/nanotextured-glass-becomes-i.html
…
3 Likes
This would be awesome for art glass too! Er - glass for framed art, that is.
10 Likes
Just don’t make your picture windows of this. Birds have enough trouble with regular glass.
12 Likes
Could this put a stop to lensflare?
2 Likes
Would it reduce unwanted “second” or ghost images in some optic systems?
Can it be applied to more than photons?
I bet this is the next coating to be applied to high end optics and Luxotica’s flagship brand glasses, and a few years later, as an option for most glasses.
1 Like
My problem with a lot of “nano” stuff is that most nanoscale particulates are strong carcinogens.
That scientist in the pic isn’t wearing gloves to avoid leaving fingerprints.
1 Like
Yup. Article doesn’t even mention the usual telling line of, “10 years away from consumer products”.
Consumer ready numbers:
1 year away: working on actual production. More likely 2-5 years away.
5 years away: still working out kinks in the tech, but have some promising leads. More likely 10 years away from production.
10 years away: still working out kinks in the tech, but have no idea how to fix them. (Surely someone will in 10 years!) Future uncertain.
15+ years away: don’t have a working prototype, maybe just some interesting lab results.
3 Likes
This isn’t a nanoparticle coating. It’s etching nanoscale features into the glass itself.
Note that some antireflective coatings - which this technologyaims to replace - do contain nanoparticles. So if you want to see fewer nanoparticles in commercial use, root for things that can replace them. Note that I am explicitly not commenting on the premise/goal itself.
3 Likes
2 Likes
same thing was done by MIT in 2012:
if we are speculating about when this will be brought to market, my understanding is that the the problem isn’t making the surface texture. the problem is we don’t really have any transparent material hard enough to not erode/corrode when carved into structures at this scale and size. In order for the cones to have their optical effect they have to be on the outside surface, not under anything, so they can’t be under another layer or protective coating. so we can make it, we just can’t make it last worth fuck all, and it goes from being much better to much worse once the microstructures become damaged.
i can’t find any photos of glass with smashed microcones, but i imagine the optical properties get pretty weird places.
and the problem of bringing it to market seems to be waiting for some breakthrough that enables a new material that meets the required criteria optically and strength/durability. That’s the kind of thing that is hard to predict and unlikely. but who knows, we are all walking around with pocket super computer/video/photo/phone/audio systems in our pockets as if its no big deal afterall…
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
5 Likes
Both the technology to improve my glasses and the technology to just improve my eyeballs directly have been claimed to be ten or so years out - place your bets folks
1 Like
Totally depends on the material (both chemcial composition and morphology). I work with nanomaterials that I can drink straight out of the flask. This is describing changing the nanoscale surface morphology on the material itself.
And, I’d think “touch robustness” would be something that would be important as well, given the potential application.
I’d also wager this would be quite hydrophobic, and thus anti-fog as well.
1 Like
yes, it is anti-dust, hydro-phobic, etc. and the durability issue is what is holding it back.
1 Like
Maybe eventually I’ll be able to get my damn orion’s crystal.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
