this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
639 points (97.6% liked)

Greentext

3994 readers
1620 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Muffi@programming.dev 74 points 8 months ago (5 children)

"extremely rare" is a way of saying second most common that I haven't heard before.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 39 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The rare stone thing would be better for nuclear power. Find lots of rare stone, put it together in a huge pile, they get warm and cause mysterious diseases.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Uranium is actually pretty common, refining out the right isotope is the complicated part. Heck there were a couple natural nuclear reactors in a place that generated power for a few million years.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Isn't uranium that's pure enough naturally to cause a reaction on its own really rare? I'm referring to the Chicago Pile experiment. It was so simple that it could have been theoretically built thousands of years ago which is crazy to think about.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Not really. Every single shovel full of dirt has trace amounts. It's just gathering enough into a pile. Like I said, nature did it on earth, before humans existed. It's weapons grade uranium that's really rare

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You can't get a reaction when it's that trace though. It needs to be unusually pure to be able to stack a bunch of raw ore and get a reaction.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Nature did get the reaction with no humans. I don't know what to tell you

[–] herrvogel@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Silicon is just the base material. The whole process involves a whole bunch of other chemicals, and some of those are made of much rarer stuff than silicon.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.ml 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Sure, Silicon works as a cheap base. Boron, phosphorus, arsenic and antimony are also used in the process, though. Other elements are also finding use in the process.

There is also a minor error in the middle about the 'sigils'. When scribing process is happening, the other elements are embedded into or deposited onto the substrate between 'scribings'.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think they mean silicon, I think they mean gold, which is also a crucial component to electronics.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Gold also isn't all that rare. It's value is so high because of jewelry marketing, not rarity.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You may be confusing with diamonds. Gold is, and in fact, any element heavier than iron are pretty rare because they cannot be created by stars alone according to current models, they need more extreme and rare astrophysics phenomenons like supernova and black holes.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago

Yes I think that is the exact confusion I had.

[–] TheChurn@kbin.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Gold is rare, compared to just about every other element, in accessible areas of earth. All the gold ever discovered on Earth would fit inside a 23 meter (75 foot) cube. This is about 244 thousand tons, in all of human history.

Compare this to iron, where just the United States produces 46 Million tons in 2022 alone.

There is plenty of gold deep within the Earth - it is very dense, so it sank towards the core when Earth was recently formed - but on the surface and the proximal crust, it is not found in abundance.

[–] brakenium@lemm.ee 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Is that 23mx23mx23m or 23 cubic meters?

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Those...Are the same thing?

Edit: I thought they meant 23x23x23 as in dimensions not multiples

[–] southernbrewer@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

23x23x23 is 12167 cubic meters.

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Okay I see where I fucked that up

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Technically correct but just cause there are minerals in the ground doesn’t mean they can be extracted.

Maybe i am wrong but i keep hearing about silicon being harder to come, i suppose op was specifically speaking about the silicon usable for computing.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

silicon being harder to come

interesting silicone usually makes it easier for me to come