Science & Space :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For all that is Scientifically related to Cosmology and Space. (NB: Please take discussions about UFOs, possible Alien contact, Crop-Circles, Alien Abductions, Planet-X and Niburu to the ‘Paranormal and Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Thought you might enjoy this : )

Metal Becomes Transparent Under High Pressure
March 12, 2009

Sodium, a white metal at pressures below 1.5 Mbar (left -- picture at 1.1 Mbar, 1 Mbar = 1 million atmospheres), turns black at 1.5 Mbar (center -- picture at 1.56 Mbar) and becomes red transparent at 1.9 Mbar (right -- picture at 1.99 Mbar). It is predicted to become colorless and transparent like glass at ~3 Mbar.

An international team of scientists have discovered a transparent form of the element sodium (Na). The team, led by Artem Oganov, Professor of Theoretical Crystallography at Stony Brook University, and Yanming Ma, the lead author and professor of physics at Jilin University in China, was able to demonstrate that sodium defies normal physical expectations by going transparent under pressure. The results are published in the March 12 edition of the journal Nature.

“It is well known that at sufficiently high compression all materials must go metallic,” said Oganov. “This is seen in the metallization of hydrogen at high pressures and temperatures inside planets Jupiter and Saturn.”

However, as the researchers found, element sodium does just the opposite. A perfect white metal at atmospheric pressure, on increasing pressure sodium first turns black, then (at the pressure of 2 million atmospheres) red transparent, and eventually becomes a colorless transparent material - just like glass.

“This fundamental result is important for understanding properties of highly compressed matter, particularly within stars and giant planets,” said Oganov.[end]
Full article

T Bird,
I read a while back an article in the Electric Universe community that commented about Nitrogen being driven to a metallicity state under pressure,
and that electrical energy at power levels in the range of Stars/Galactic Birkeland currents.....can transmute Celestial gases....into metallicity
Z pinch*

excerpt Holoscience - Planet Birthing More Evidence

Comment: Given the orthodox notion of how planets form, it is not clear why we should expect more gas giant planets about a star simply because it has more heavy elements in its spectrum.

However, I argued in my earlier news item that stars "give birth" from time to time by electrical parturition. It occurs in a nova-type discharge from their charged interior. Unlike the hydrogen-bomb model of stars, there is no internal heating. Intense plasma discharges at the stellar surface give rise to starshine. Those discharges synthesize "metals" that continually rain into the star's depths. The heavy element abundance in a star's spectrum is not just an inheritance from old supernovae. Stellar interiors become enriched in heavy elements. The star "children" are gas giants or binary partners formed from those heavier elements after expulsion from the star.

Therefore we should simply expect from the electric star model that the longer a star has been shining the more heavy elements it will show in its spectrum and the more time it has had to "give birth." So stars forming today are not more likely to have planets than earlier generations. They probably have not had time to have planetary "children." Whether a star has planetary companions or not is NOT a condition of its birth. We should expect that below a certain metallicity (that is, age) a star will not have planets. We do not expect babies to give birth! Planet formation has more to do with the growth of internal electrical stress in a star. It can be enhanced by episodes of unusual electric stress in its environment. We should be looking closely at stars that have undergone nova outbursts.

It should be noted that plasma cosmologists have a view of star formation that allows for a number of condensed bodies to be formed in close proximity at the same time. And the separation of elements by their "critical ionization velocity" in a plasma pinch may offer an alternative explanation for differences in metallicity between the bodies. However, it is not clear to what extent this mechanism plays a role in the development of planets about a star. Certainly, it does not explain the propensity for planets to be found in higher numbers near stars of higher metallicity.

The stellar parturition model seems to offer a simple solution to:
a) the presence of heavy elements in gas giants,
b) a greater number of gas giants being found around stars of high metallicity, and
c) the propensity for close orbits of the gas giants about their parent star.

Wal Thornhill

T Bird con't,

I find it amazing that the cosmos provides the necessary base materials...even if they be gases,
to create metals and other atomic structures,
which become other things from pressure......pressure...which an Electric Universe can provide.

LOL...the Star trek movie were Scotty gives the Earth businessman the atomic design for Transparent Aluminum : )


T Bird



Post Edited (09-Feb-12 04:35)

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Totally confused on The Periodic Table 1087 Ahatmose 05-Feb-12 03:39
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 371 JonnyMcA 05-Feb-12 09:55
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 259 Ahatmose 05-Feb-12 14:57
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 345 JonnyMcA 05-Feb-12 15:52
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 328 JonnyMcA 05-Feb-12 16:01
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 296 Ahatmose 06-Feb-12 03:10
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 296 JonnyMcA 06-Feb-12 18:26
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 315 Spiros 05-Feb-12 22:00
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 315 JonnyMcA 05-Feb-12 22:47
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 312 Spiros 07-Feb-12 22:40
Re: Totally confused on The Periodic Table 308 Susan Doris 06-Feb-12 08:43
Re: Jonny/Ahatmose 340 Thunderbird 08-Feb-12 03:02
Index of Refraction 365 Ahatmose 09-Feb-12 03:08
Re: Index of Refraction 341 Ahatmose 09-Feb-12 03:25
Re: Index of Refraction 1284 JonnyMcA 09-Feb-12 08:34
Re: Index of Refraction 335 Ahatmose 09-Feb-12 16:10
Index of Refraction: The solution ? 359 Ahatmose 09-Feb-12 17:41
Re: Index of Refraction: The solution ? 348 JonnyMcA 11-Feb-12 09:03
Re: Index of Refraction 339 JonnyMcA 11-Feb-12 08:59
Re: Index of Refraction 324 Ahatmose 11-Feb-12 12:29
Re: Index of Refraction 362 JonnyMcA 11-Feb-12 14:12
Re: Index of Refraction 334 Ahatmose 12-Feb-12 13:11
Addendum: Index of Refraction 324 Ahatmose 12-Feb-12 13:19
Second Addendum: Index of Refraction 266 Ahatmose 12-Feb-12 13:26
Third Addendum: Index of Refraction 296 Ahatmose 12-Feb-12 13:32
Re: Third Addendum: Index of Refraction 303 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 16:03
Re: Third Addendum: Index of Refraction 319 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 21:17
Re: Second Addendum: Index of Refraction 326 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 15:40
Re: Addendum: Index of Refraction 306 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 15:34
Re: Index of Refraction 366 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 13:30
Re: Index of Refraction 311 Ahatmose 12-Feb-12 13:48
Re: Index of Refraction 324 JonnyMcA 12-Feb-12 15:32
Re: Index of Refraction 325 Ahatmose 13-Feb-12 01:23
Re: Index of Refraction 365 JonnyMcA 13-Feb-12 08:23
Re: Index of Refraction 351 Ahatmose 13-Feb-12 16:01
Re: Index of Refraction 342 JonnyMcA 13-Feb-12 19:01
Re: Index of Refraction 320 Ahatmose 13-Feb-12 16:47
Re: Index of Refraction 307 JonnyMcA 13-Feb-12 19:07
Re: Index of Refraction 321 Ahatmose 13-Feb-12 17:37
Re: Index of Refraction 306 JonnyMcA 13-Feb-12 19:20
Re: Index of Refraction 438 Spiros 05-Apr-18 14:20
Talk about stretching credibility: Index of Refraction 329 Ahatmose 13-Feb-12 05:48


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.