Assertion: osmium's modulus | /r/HasProperty | bulk
Facets:
Source sentences:
text: A paper by Cynn et al published in 2002 reported that osmium had this bulk modulus, based on an experimental result; but several subsequent authors have cast doubt upon this (for example Sahu et al in Sept 2005, who refer also to other such papers - see References section).
text: Correspondingly, its bulk modulus is extremely high, reported between 395 and 462 GPa, which rivals that of diamond (443 GPa).
text: Correspondingly, its bulk modulus is extremely high, reported between 395 and 462 GPa, which rivals that of diamond (443 GPa).
text: Although osmium is hard for a metal, it's far softer than diamond, so when an estimate of its bulk modulus turned out higher than diamond, no one took it very seriously, says Hyunchae Cynn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.
text: Although osmium is hard for a metal, it's far softer than diamond, so when an estimate of its bulk modulus turned out higher than diamond, no one took it very seriously, says Hyunchae Cynn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.
text: Although osmium is hard for a metal, it's far softer than diamond, so when an estimate of its bulk modulus turned out higher than diamond, no one took it very seriously, says Hyunchae Cynn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.
text: Correspondingly, its bulk modulus is extremely high -- commonly quoted as 462GPa, which is higher than that of diamond but lower than that of ADNR or aggregated diamond nanorods -- although there is some debate in the academic community about whether it is in fact this high.
text: Correspondingly, its bulk modulus is extremely high, reported between 7002395000000000000♠395 and 7011462000000000000♠462 GPa , which rivals that of diamond (7011443000000000000
text: Although osmium is hard for a metal, it's far softer than diamond, so when an estimate of its bulk modulus turned out higher than diamond, no one took it very seriously, says Hyunchae Cynn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.
text: Although osmium is hard for a metal, it's far softer than diamond, so when an estimate of its bulk modulus turned out higher than diamond, no one took it very seriously, says Hyunchae Cynn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.