Gorilla Glass – The ‘Real’ Transparent Aluminum?

Any good innovative company will do what it can to mine all of its products for possible uses, even if it takes decades.  The latest example of this is Gorilla Glass, based on glass developed in the early 1960s by Corning, but not really used by the company until recently.  The durable scratch-resistant surface is particularly well-suited for high-tech displays, particularly thin screens like those found in cell phones.

But while the process that helps form this glass was around for decades, successful product development took over forty years.  The challenge (or one of them anyway) comes from maintaining the idea long enough to let knowledge, markets, or other things change to the point where successful product development is now possible.  The 1960s product required only slight tweaking to be mass-produced today.  If that knowledge had been lost, it would have been much harder to develop Gorilla Glass

As for the title, transparent aluminum means a couple of things.  The first definition is literal, achieved through exposure to high power X-rays (and transparent to ultraviolet light).  But the one I thought of came from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.  It referred to the extra-strong, clear material that was used for portals and such in the 23rd century.  With reports that Gorilla glass (and its predecessor) could be banged and bent, I think Corning should think about marketing the glass for windows and portals for intense environments.  Or possibly whale tanks…

Some ‘Dangerous’ Things to Ponder – Be Skeptical

This week Big Think started its month of thinking dangerously (H/T Framing Science).  The notion is to highlight a ‘controversial’ idea every weekday in August.  As a thought experiment, it’s not a bad idea.  The problem can come in the presentation (as the comments may suggest).  For instance, yesterday’s idea of drugging the drinking water with non-therapeutic levels of lithium (there is apparently some suggestion it could lower the suicide rate.  A four minute video is not nearly long enough to discuss all the different potential consequences of adding a substance to drinking water.  No discussion of drug interaction, no discussion of the number of substances that already leach into the drinking water, and the possibility that low level doses (like those suggested) could accumulate over time and have different effects.

By all means follow along as Big Think presents such ‘dangerous’ ideas as vacating  the planet before we outgrow it, letting people sell their kidneys, and various geoengineering proposals.  Please don’t think they’re presenting an effective representation of the whole idea and all the known (or anticipated) consequences.