Talk:Carbonado

message: A fascinating aspect of carbonados is that there is no consensus about their origins, as illustrated by the quotes and citations below. The article has unduly emphasized a recent hypothesis.
Heaney, P. J., Vicenzi, E. P., and De, Subarnarekha, 2005, Strange diamonds: The mysterious origins of carbonado and framesite. Elements 1, pp. 85-89
“As this review illustrates, widely accepted genetic models for these diamond aggregates remain an unfulfilled challenge,”
Kagi, H., Sato, S., Akagi, T., and Kanda, H., 	2007, Generation history of carbonado inferred from photoluminescence spectra, cathodoluminescence imaging, and carbon-isotopic composition. American Mineralogist 92, pp. 217-224 
“The CL halos are traces of radiation damage from radioactive nuclides. The texture of the haloes suggests that the radiation damage was a secondary event after formation of the carbonado diamonds.”
Konishi, H., Xu, H., Spicuzza, M., and Valley, J. W., 2008, Polycrystalline diamond inclusions in Jack Hills zircon: Carbonado?, Goldschmidt Conference Abstracts, p. A489
“Carbonado is widely thought to form by meteorite impact on terrestrial continental crust.” 
Rondeau, B., Sautter, V., and Barjon, J., 2008, New columnar texture of carbonado: Cathodoluminescence study” in Diamond & Related Materials, in press, doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2008.04.006
“The origin of carbonado is still under debate. Several hypotheses have been proposed [Ref. 1 and references therein]: high-pressure origin (formation within the Earth's mantle, or during a meteoritic impact on the Earth’s surface) or low-pressure origin (formation by irradiation of an organic carbonaceous precursor, or by Chemical Vapor Deposition outside the solar system as ejecta from a dying star).” (Their Ref. 1 is Heaney et al. (2005), cited above)
Omphacite (talk) 02:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some relevant quotes from the literature with citations 

message: New research says that the diamonds actually are from space. See http://www.physorg.com/news87577799.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DrewHenson (talk • contribs) 19:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure how to add this in... 

message: Science isn't made of press releases... always be skeptical of scientists who say they have disproved all other theories simply by having evidence of their own. And might as well let things sit for a few days before bringing the revolution to Wikipedia :v) .
Easy does it. Mind the POV. Potatoswatter 21:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the article had been thrown into disorder and screwed up, I attempted a small restructuring. If the new theory really is a POV issue, and remains unproven, someone will need to rewrite some of the statements made. I have no clue on the subject matter, and am merely copyediting what I could make out from the article content. SauliH 06:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  consensus 

message: My co-workers and I at the Canadian institute for research and development of crystalines have categorized this information as false, for it is not viable. We propose that immediate action is taken or we will take action ourselves. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.116.200.53 (talk) 15:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just re-organized a bit to reduce the redundancy and remove some superlatives. Please add further sourced info from the the American Mineralogist and Elements references - I currently don't have access to them. Vsmith 14:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  False information 

message: The first line of the introduction states that carbonado is "the toughest form of natural diamond", but that characteristic is not addressed anywhere else in the article. I was expecting to find some discussion explaining what makes it tougher than other forms in "Unusual Properties", but the section instead appears to deal mostly with origins-related issues (even though there is a separate section for that).   My guess is that the inclusions interrupt cleavage planes. (I have no idea if I have used anything close to the correct terminology there -- I know almost nothing of mineralogy or materials science.) Would anyone who has an explanation care to add it to the article?
Starling2001 (talk) 21:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toughest? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Carbonado. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070809204752/http://www.fiu.edu:80/~jgara002/research%20statement/carbonado/carbonado-infrared.htm to http://www.fiu.edu/~jgara002/research%20statement/carbonado/carbonado-infrared.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Carbonado. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111228141115/http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2007/0612-mystery_diamonds.htm to http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2007/0612-mystery_diamonds.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified