Impurities

[jasonbe]

I’m not sure if the word crystallized can properly be used to describe the state of semisolids, liquids, and gasses – in addition to solids. When I think of crystals, I think of orderliness. I’m wondering if there is some way to measure this orderliness. If so, is there also a way to describe how much different amounts and types of impurities change types - of or amounts of, orderliness?

 

[crashsite]

A Call to Action

You don't seem to have any interest in actually doing experiments but, crystals are one of the things that you can do quite a bit of simple stuff with. You can, for example look at salt under a magnifier to see the square pattern of its crystal. You can grow a sugar crystal on a string and see the structure very graphically. Those are simple enough that they are common 5th and 6th grade science fair projects.

I saw a, History Detectives show on PBS just the other day where they used a polarizer to test if an old crucifix was glass or natural crystal by polarization (a test that can be done with nothing motre than the sun and one lens of a pair of polarized sunglasses).

Read up on the basics of liquid crystal displays and find something that has one (like an LCD watch) and disassemble it and look at how the display is made and connected to the circuit board. You can buy a watch with a dead battery for a nickel at just about any garage sale.

So, the answer to your question is that crystals are very complex and there's a lot of math and technical stuff about them and there's simple stuff you can do with them, too.

Read some material on the basics of semiconductors (transistors and diodes) and it will tell you about how "doping" crystals can change their electrical properties and how different types of doped crystals can be used to fabricate diodes and transistors. It can also give you a practical working knowledge of how "cat whisker" galena crystals work in the old crystal set radios.

You can also read up on the piezoelectric effect (how crystals can react to physical bending).

There's a lifetime's worth of farting around with crystals that can be done even if you don't want to get into the technical details of them all that deep. If your interest extends beyond just sitting around and pondering the esoteric and mystical nature of them...do some of it.

 

[jasonbe]

You don't seem to have any interest in actually doing experiments but, crystals are one of the things that you can do quite a bit of simple stuff with. You can, for example look at salt under a magnifier to see the square pattern of its crystal. You can grow a sugar crystal on a string and see the structure very graphically. Those are simple enough that they are common 5th and 6th grade science fair projects.

I saw a, History Detectives show on PBS just the other day where they used a polarizer to test if an old crucifix was glass or natural crystal by polarization (a test that can be done with nothing motre than the sun and one lens of a pair of polarized sunglasses).

Read up on the basics of liquid crystal displays and find something that has one (like an LCD watch) and disassemble it and look at how the display is made and connected to the circuit board. You can buy a watch with a dead battery for a nickel at just about any garage sale.

So, the answer to your question is that crystals are very complex and there's a lot of math and technical stuff about them and there's simple stuff you can do with them, too.

Read some material on the basics of semiconductors (tr5ansistors and diodes) and it will tell you about how "doping" crystals can change their electrical properties and how different types of doped crystals can be used to fabricate diodes and transistors. It can also give you a practical working knowledge of how "cat whisker" galena crystals work in the old crystal set radios.

You can also read up on the piezoelectric effect (how crystals can react to physical bending).

There's a lifetime's worth of farting around with crystals that can be done even if you don't want to get into the technical details of them all that deep. If your interest extends beyond just sitting around and pondering the esoteric and mystical nature of them...do some of it.

I wasn't aware that there were so many applications of crystals. Doing research on the crystal displays might be very useful. Would this research involve qualities of different displays anytime soon if someone such as myself who does not have a lot of experience with electronics started doing the research? Actually, my interest at this time does not extend beyond pondering the esoteric and mystical nature of them. I'd like descriptions of them. For example, can a crystal be described as fluffy? Can a crystal be described as having a greater three dimensional symmetry? Is it possible for the same impurity to effect the form of a fluffy crystal more than the form of a crystal that has a greater three dimensional symmetry? I'm mostly interested in the effects of impurities. I imagine that considering these effects might not be something that is done until people study crystals at a level that is more advanced than anything that I intend to become involved in. However, because impurities might effect the form of crystals, remembering the names of impurities and how shapes change doesn't seem to me to be something that a person needs a lot of experience to do. I don’t need to know the chemical structure of the impurProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

ies or a mathematical definition of the shape of crystals. However, I can't say that locating either type of information is easy.

 

[crashsite]

A New Neighborhood?

I'm sorry to say but, taking the approach to the subject that you've indicated is going to yield you zero useful information about crystals. Also, unfortunately, this seems to be the approach you take to all technical endeavors. You might find information that will be more useful to you in less technically inclined forums where the "esoteric" and "mystical" nature of phjenomena will be bantered about more in line with your thinking.

 

[jasonbe]

I'm sorry to say but, taking the approach to the subject that you've indicated is going to yield you zero useful information about crystals. Also, unfortunately, this seems to be the approach you take to all technical endeavors. You might find information that will be more useful to you in less technically inclined forums where the "esoteric" and "mystical" nature of phjenomena will be bantered about more in line with your thinking.

Would you think about my question and let me know if any site or type of sites comes to mind? I wouldn't agree that this topic doesn't belong at this site. I'll consider that it doesn't and welcome feedback.

 

[crashsite]

Relo?

Would you think about my question and let me know if any site or type of sites comes to mind? I wouldn't agree that this topic doesn't belong at this site. I'll consider that it doesn't and welcome feedback.

The topic itself is a good match for this site. How you are trying to deal with it isn't really a very good match. Like I say, you might be more at home in a forum that enjoys discussing the artsy-fartsy, pseudo-techie aspects of stuff.

And, no...I don't have any suggestions. That's just not my thing.

 

[jasonbe]

The topic itself is a good match for this site. How you are trying to deal with it isn't really a very good match. Like I say, you might be more at home in a forum that enjoys discussing the artsy-fartsy, pseudo-techie aspects of stuff.

And, no...I don't have any suggestions. That's just not my thing.

I don't want to reply to your post in a way that might limit input from other people. You seem to have some conception of how I am addressing the topic. I may at a later time try to explain to you why and how I am addressing it - as least how I think I am addressing it. Because you seem to think that the topic is a good match for this site - and seem to have a conception of how I am addressing it, would you try to find a way of addressing the question that is consistent with this objectives of this site - and also as consistent as possible with how you think that I am addressing it? I wrote something in my last post that may suggest that other sites weren't addressing the question in a certain way. I can't be certain of this.

 

[crashsite]

Old Tricks

I may at a later time try to explain to you why and how I am addressing it - as least how I think I am addressing it. Because you seem to think that the topic is a good match for this site - and seem to have a conception of how I am addressing it, would you try to find a way of addressing the question that is consistent with this objectives of this site - and also as consistent as possible with how you think that I am addressing it?

You give nothing to respond to. The stuff you are coming up with is very much like that of some strung out hippie, in a head shop, shopping for crystals after reading some eastern religion book and becoming convinced that crystals provide some insight to the inner workings of the universe.

You are pulling the same stunt you've done before of making sure you just keep feeding out a bunch of crap while being very careful not to do any real study or experimentation of the subject.

 

[jasonbe]

You give nothing to respond to. The stuff you are coming up with is very much like that of some strung out hippie, in a head shop, shopping for crystals after reading some eastern religion book and becoming convinced that crystals provide some insight to the inner workings of the universe.

You are pulling the same stunt you've done before of making sure you just keep feeding out a bunch of crap while being very careful not to do any real study or experimentation of the subject.

In my opinion, you described at least one admirable characteristic of a group of people who I might classify differently.

 

[crashsite]

The world of beads and bangles

In my opinion, you described at least one admirable characteristic of a group of people who I might classify differently.

That's the kind of forum you should seek out. The kind that would appeal to the starry-eyed hippies and those who relate to and admire them. I'm not quite sure what you're doing here. You obviously don't want the kind of information that technically inclined people have to give.

 

[MrAl]

Hi Jason,


I couldnt help notice that you are again asking questions that are somewhat
advanced for your apparent educational background. I think this is why you
are getting some adverse replies.

You are obviously a *very* intelligent person, but you are cheating your
own intellect by not covering some of the ground floor subject material that
is basic to much of what the questions you are asking are about.

Dont cheat yourself out of a much more interesting and rewarding life by
skipping some of the ground work.

 

[jasonbe]

That's the kind of forum you should seek out. The kind that would appeal to the starry-eyed hippies and those who relate to and admire them. I'm not quite sure what you're doing here. You obviously don't want the kind of information that technically inclined people have to give.

How technical do descriptions of impurities, crystals, and changes in crystalline structures have to be? Wouldn't it take less time to describe them in the least technical language that you could think of?

 

[jasonbe]

Hi Jason,


I couldnt help notice that you are again asking questions that are somewhat
advanced for your apparent educational background. I think this is why you
are getting some adverse replies.

You are obviously a *very* intelligent person, but you are cheating your
own intellect by not covering some of the ground floor subject material that
is basic to much of what the questions you are asking are about.

Dont cheat yourself out of a much more interesting and rewarding life by
skipping some of the ground work.

It doesn't seem to be a question that has to be answered with a technical language. If it does, I think that a reason for this might be because English is presently lacking in words or no one has taken the time to describe these things differently. I don't consider it cheating because learning a lot about crystals isn't a priority for me now.

 

[crashsite]

The "long-winded" answer

How technical do descriptions of impurities, crystals, and changes in crystalline structures have to be? Wouldn't it take less time to describe them in the least technical language that you could think of?

Absolutely not. Technical language is not developed in order to make a technical subject confusing but, rather to give technical people some common terminology and verbage to better ensure accurate exchange of the information. When people don't like or accept or "get" the technical language, it doesn't change the fact that it's useful.

There are those here who have the same complaint about me when it comes to math. In my case, I'm very poor at math. I just don't see the answers in it and, I'll tell you something else. A lot of people who think they do see the answers in math really don't. What they do is parrot back the formulas and equations they learned without actually bothering to "learn" it...and think that memorizing the math is the same as understanding the concept.

So, in a way, I'm in a similar situation as you are but, there are ways around the math. It's by ensuring that you have a good conceptual understanding of the basics that you can build on and learn the terminology so you can convey it in acceptable technical language.

It's just that coming up with nut-fringe stuff isn't the solution. MrAl is right. If you want to interface with the technical world you have to do enough of the groundwork to at least be able to use the accepted terminology and concepts that are in common use.

Now, to you question. A crystal is conceptually pretty simple. It consists of atoms arranged in a well structured manner that gives the crystal it's form and characteristics. There's a lot that can be gotten from researching crystals and also just looking at them and doing experiments with them, all on a pretty elementary level.

But, asking about crystals and then sluffing it off by saying that you aren't really interested in crystals, anyway is not going to get you a good response when you ask your next question. Why should people bother to try to answer your next question when you've said that you're not really interested in getting an answer to the last one?

The thing is, there are a lot of people like you out there in the world (actaully, most people). It's just that most of them don't bother to post in technical forums. You really might be more at home in forums where it may seem normal for crystals to exhibit "fluffiness" and have more than 3 dimensions...and a host of other atributes that aren't supported by science.

You might consider joining the Mormon Church. Their founder, Joseph Smith regularly used "seer stones" to see supernatural things. The Book of Mormon, the basic Mormon scripture of ancient people living in the Americas, was supposedly transcribed from gold plates, buried in a hill in New York State. Smith claims to have used a sort of eyeglass device (buried with the plates) called a Urim and Thumim (The Urim and Thummim Photo Exposition) that he would peer through to translate the ancient text to English (rather poor English as it turns out). But, the point is that Mormons are convinced of the reality of Smith's seer stones and there's even a collection of them in the Mormon archives. Mormons will never tire of you expounding about such things so long as you profess to be of the Mormon faith.

Back when Star Trek (original) was hot, somebody published a technical manual for Star Fleet Command. I forget the name of the book but, it should be pretty easy to look up on the internet. Of course, one of the things that was covered was the warp drive and the role of the di-lithium crystals. Unfortunately, noone has actually built a warp drive but, that shouldn't stop you from engaging in endless discussions with Trekkies on various Star Trek websites about di-lithium crystals and their characteristics. Of course, you'll only be taken seriously if you pass yourself off as a Trekkie, too.

Energy flows in crystals are a mainstay for crystal buffs. In addition to the healing energy that can flow between crystals and living things, there are also energy flows that allow all sorts of things from communicating with beings in other universes to communicating with your pet cat. If you find some websites or forums where these types of people hang out and can pass yourself off as being at least as nut-fringe as they are you can spend a lifetime exchanging crystal lore (without fear of ever risking the embarassment of needing to know anything technical about them).

So, anyway, I'm just not sure why you are here when there's a whole world of whackos just waiting for you to wow them with your own views on crystals.

 

[jasonbe]

Absolutely not. Technical language is not developed in order to make a technical subject confusing but, rather to give technical people some common terminology and verbage to better ensure accurate exchange of the information. When people don't like or accept or "get" the technical language, it doesn't change the fact that it's useful.

There are those here who have the same complaint about me when it comes to math. In my case, I'm very poor at math. I just don't see the answers in it and, I'll tell you something else. A lot of people who think they do see the answers in math really don't. What they do is parrot back the formulas and equations they learned without actually bothering to "learn" it...and think that memorizing the math is the same as understanding the concept.

So, in a way, I'm in a similar situation as you are but, there are ways around the math. It's by ensuring that you have a good conceptual understanding of the basics that you can build on and learn the terminology so you can convey it in acceptable technical language.

It's just that coming up with nut-fringe stuff isn't the solution. MrAl is right. If you want to interface with the technical world you have to do enough of the groundwork to at least be able to use the accepted terminology and concepts that are in common use.

Now, to you question. A crystal is conceptually pretty simple. It consists of atoms arranged in a well structured manner that gives the crystal it's form and characteristics. There's a lot that can be gotten from researching crystals and also just looking at them and doing experiments with them, all on a pretty elementary level.

But, asking about crystals and then sluffing it off by saying that you aren't really interested in crystals, anyway is not going to get you a good response when you ask your next question. Why should people bother to try to answer your next question when you've said that you're not really interested in getting an answer to the last one?

The thing is, there are a lot of people like you out there in the world (actaully, most people). It's just that most of them don't bother to post in technical forums. You really might be more at home in forums where it may seem normal for crystals to exhibit "fluffiness" and have more than 3 dimensions...and a host of other atributes that aren't supported by science.

You might consider joining the Mormon Church. Their founder, Joseph Smith regularly used "seer stones" to see supernatural things. The Book of Mormon, the basic Mormon scripture of ancient people living in the Americas, was supposedly transcribed from gold plates, buried in a hill in New York State. Smith claims to have used a sort of eyeglass device (buried with the plates) called a Urim and Thumim (The Urim and Thummim Photo Exposition) that he would peer through to translate the ancient text to English (rather poorProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

nglish as it turns out). But, the point is that Mormons are convinced of the reality of Smith's seer stones and there's even a collection of them in the Mormon archives. Mormons will never tire of you expounding about such things so long as you profess to be of the Mormon faith.

Back when Star Trek (original) was hot, somebody published a technical manual for Star Fleet Command. I forget the name of the book but, it should be pretty easy to look up on the internet. Of course, one of the things that was covered was the warp drive and the role of the di-lithium crystals. Unfortunately, noone has actually built a warp drive but, that shouldn't stop you from engaging in endless discussions with Trekkies on various Star Trek websites about di-lithium crystals and their characteristics. Of course, you'll only be taken seriously if you pass yourself off as a Trekkie, too.

Energy flows in crystals are a mainstay for crystal buffs. In addition to the healing energy that can flow between crystals and living things, there are also energy flows that allow all sorts of things from communicating with beings in other universes to communicating with your pet cat. If you find some websites or forums where these types of people hang out and can pass yourself off as being at least as nut-fringe as they are you can spend a lifetime exchanging crystal lore (without fear of ever risking the embarassment of needing to know anything technical about them).

So, anyway, I'm just not sure why you are here when there's a whole world of whackos just waiting for you to wow them with your own views on crystals.

A lot of times I don’t get the technical language. If it is not a field that I am interested in, I look for simplifications – aware that different people may be interested in it with different specialties. I think that I may understand what you are saying about math – that a lot of times it does not represent things that may appear to be most apparent or even characteristics of a system. However, I’m beginning to think that it can be used as an indicator – if it is not always an empowering tool to identify at a specific time what needs to change about a system to produce specific types of change. Maybe at times math can be considered a way around some of the basics when some of the basics are not particularly useful… a language that can give people who aren’t specialists in a field some type of understanding of the way parts of a system interact.

I was saying that I didn’t plan on becoming a specialist in crystalline structures at this time. I was still interested in answers to the question.

I studied a little about molecular geometry, though I don’t know how necessary an understanding of it is to understand the question. Maybe I shouldn’t have used the word crystal – if it only means a solid structure. I was more interested in the way that systems change when irregularities – in this case an impurity, are introduced. I was interested in a model and resorted to one of a crystal – without knowing specific vocabulary related to crystals.

Are you saying that if there are any Mormons with a technical vocabulary posting at this site then they might be likely to respond to my question?

I don’t know if dilithium would be a good place to start. Any reactions involving it would seems as though it would change its shape so much that they would not be comparable to the reactants in a way that makes any type of continuum of shape apparent. Introducing new chemicals into dilithium gas might not change the shape of the boundary of the gas significantly because dilithium is so small.

I don’t know if I’m ready to learn about how energy flows in solids. I’m still having trouble identifying the path of least resistance. I’ve learned some things about equipotential lines, but I really don’t know how they related to current and the resistance of solids.

I’m not sure why I am here either, but that might be something that is more appropriate to discuss at a different site. I don’t know who the people who you refer to as whackos are or what they are doing.

 

[crashsite]

Simple Observation

Maybe at times math can be considered a way around some of the basics when some of the basics are not particularly useful… a language that can give people who aren’t specialists in a field some type of understanding of the way parts of a system interact.

When I am starting to learn something brand new I tend to look for children's books and will watch children's TV science shows. There are plenty on PBS and the NASA channel. Jumping into a forum like this isn't likely to give you very good results if you can't even understand the language that's used...much less the technical content...much less if you aren't even interested in the answer in the first place.

Are you saying that if there are any Mormons with a technical vocabulary posting at this site then they might be likely to respond to my question?

No. Mormons consider themselves to be completely "non-whacko". And, I suppose if you compare them to somebody, like the Pope, that dresses up in clownish costumes and waves smoke around in the air while mumbling in Latin...perhaps, in the big picture view of things, Mormons are no more whacko than anyone else.

I don’t know if dilithium would be a good place to start.

Considering that di-lithium crystals are the product of science fiction, I'd tend to agree that they may not be the best place to begin trying to understand crystal technology. Sometimes you gotta use a little common sense.

I don’t know who the people who you refer to as whackos are or what they are doing.

If you've been living on planet Earth for more than about six months and you haven't run across any whackos yet...you're just not paying attention to your surroundings.

 

[jasonbe]

When I am starting to learn something brand new I tend to look for children's books and will watch children's TV science shows. There are plenty on PBS and the NASA channel. Jumping into a forum like this isn't likely to give you very good results if you can't even understand the language that's used...much less the technical content...much less if you aren't even interested in the answer in the first place.



No. Mormons consider themselves to be completely "non-whacko". And, I suppose if you compare them to somebody, like the Pope, that dresses up in clownish costumes and waves smoke around in the air while mumbling in Latin...perhaps, in the big picture view of things, Mormons are no more whacko than anyone else.




Considering that di-lithium crystals are the product of science fiction, I'd tend to agree that they may not be the best place to begin trying to understand crystal technology. Sometimes you gotta use a little common sense.



If you've been living on planet Earth for more than about six months and you haven't run across any whackos yet...you're just not paying attention to your surroundings.

I was under the impression – perhaps the wrong impression, that when people from different fields worked together on a project, they didn’t have to know each others’ specialties. That is the purpose of them working together – not just to work faster by involving more people on the same problem with the same training, but to communicate across barriers that limit their particular field. I was thinking that mathematical representations might serve as a gauge for what is going on in a system, and characteristics of some of these representations might be able to be communicated to people in a laypeople’s language. Of course, a layperson might not be able to make a mathematical representation, but such a representation might be able to be described to them in much the same way that a piece of art can be described.

Of course, if you don’t take my questions seriously, I don’t suppose that you will expect anyone else to – including Mormons.

I don’t know of the extent of the word crystal. I don’t know how dilithium molecules react with other substances, but I’m assuming that if they can react to form a variety of products then the shapes of these might have to be explained by individual molecular bonds and not arrangements on a larger scale. I may have made some assumptions about how dilithium gas would react to the introduction of other molecules without considering the initial conditions.

It is my interpretation that your responses have a degree of conclusiveness – one that suggests to me that you do not expect a response to your statements. If you would like one, then you’ll have to be more specific about what type of person you are referring to when you write wacko.

 

[crashsite]

Whacko Jacko

It is my interpretation that your responses have a degree of conclusiveness – one that suggests to me that you do not expect a response to your statements. If you would like one, then you’ll have to be more specific about what type of person you are referring to when you write wacko.

It's all very subjective. To me, the idea of some guy going out in the woods and coming back with a story of having talked directly with the religious trinity and John the Baptist (who, it was reported did have his head) is pretty whacko. To a devout Mormon, it seems perfectly natural and normal. In fact, the Mormons believe that the president of their church, even today, can speak directly with God.

I have a general rule. If it looks like a whacko, quacks like a whacko and waddles like a whacko...it's most likely a whacko. So, if my analyses seem a bit direct, it comes from a lifetime of repeatedly being proven right when it comes to whackos.

Here's a quickie. Let's say that some guy decides that there's technical merit in some terminology that was dreamed up in the mind of a science fiction writer and tries to make sense of how it might work in the real world. Just for argument's sake, let's use a term like, "di-lithium crystals" (a critical component of United Federation star ship warp drives and the object leading to many a fist fight with alien beings by one Capt. James T. Kirk). Someone who would treat that sort of science fiction as being real is...well...pretty much a whacko.

Are you seeing a trend develop here?

The world is full of whackos. I'm just a little surprised that you don't seem more enthusiastic about sharing your ideas with them.

 

[jasonbe]

It's all very subjective. To me, the idea of some guy going out in the woods and coming back with a story of having talked directly with the religious trinity and John the Baptist (who, it was reported did have his head) is pretty whacko. To a devout Mormon, it seems perfectly natural and normal. In fact, the Mormons believe that the president of their church, even today, can speak directly with God.

I have a general rule. If it looks like a whacko, quacks like a whacko and waddles like a whacko...it's most likely a whacko. So, if my analyses seem a bit direct, it comes from a lifetime of repeatedly being proven right when it comes to whackos.

Here's a quickie. Let's say that some guy decides that there's technical merit in some terminology that was dreamed up in the mind of a science fiction writer and tries to make sense of how it might work in the real world. Just for argument's sake, let's use a term like, "di-lithium crystals" (a critical component of United Federation star ship warp drives and the object leading to many a fist fight with alien beings by one Capt. James T. Kirk). Someone who would treat that sort of science fiction as being real is...well...pretty much a whacko.

Are you seeing a trend develop here?

The world is full of whackos. I'm just a little surprised that you don't seem more enthusiastic about sharing your ideas with them.

I don't identify some people the way that you do so I don't know how useful it would be for me to communicate with you about population groups.