Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees(fastcompany.com)
fastcompany.com
Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
https://www.fastcompany.com/91142992/this-impossibly-thin-fabric-could-cool-you-down-by-16-degrees
12 comments
I'm suspicious that perhaps silver nanowires might be a health risk? I believe finely-divided silver can be toxic, at least in some circumstances.
Also, it's a composite with a plastic material, and would probably resist all attempts to recycle it, resulting eventually in microplastics (contaminated with metallic silver).
Also, it's a composite with a plastic material, and would probably resist all attempts to recycle it, resulting eventually in microplastics (contaminated with metallic silver).
I am concerned about all kinds of nanowires. If they are sufficiently strong, they should be able to damage your lungs in the exact same way that asbestos does.
Not through a chemical reaction, but a mechanical process that damages cells. The damage makes it easier to mutate. Which creates a long-term potential for cancer.
Silver nanowires should not be as strong as carbon nanotubes. But are they stronger than cell walls? If so, the potential exists for the same kind of harm as asbestos. Will we only learn whether it happens in practice only after they are widely used?
Not through a chemical reaction, but a mechanical process that damages cells. The damage makes it easier to mutate. Which creates a long-term potential for cancer.
Silver nanowires should not be as strong as carbon nanotubes. But are they stronger than cell walls? If so, the potential exists for the same kind of harm as asbestos. Will we only learn whether it happens in practice only after they are widely used?
Do you mean cell membranes? Animals such as humans do not have cell walls outside of their cell membranes like many bacteria, plants, fungi etc.
I do, thanks for the correction.
Asbestos gets into our lungs, winds up poking us, and does a lot of damage on the way out. If it ever gets out. Some fibers can get stuck for years.
It's entirely mechanical. Any strong enough fiber of a similar size and shape will create the same class of problems.
Asbestos gets into our lungs, winds up poking us, and does a lot of damage on the way out. If it ever gets out. Some fibers can get stuck for years.
It's entirely mechanical. Any strong enough fiber of a similar size and shape will create the same class of problems.
Do you know any way of testing for asbestos at home (outside of US so can't send a sample anywhere and don't know any labs in the area if there even are any)?
Asbestos is dangerous because it will not decompose in your body.
Neither will silver.
Silver is uniquely non-toxic among heavy metals. You can consume a lot of it without consequences. Some people do, look up "colloidal silver".
However, it also has a long elimination half-life, and it can stain the skin.
However, it also has a long elimination half-life, and it can stain the skin.
> without consequences.
Also look up "blue skin colloidal silver."
Also look up "blue skin colloidal silver."
silver has been used for a while in antimicrobial fabrics, to my knowledge it's pretty safe
Something that kills cells on contact doesn’t sound particularly safe.
Like alcohol or oxygen?
I feel like the title should qualify that this is 16degF
The article was written for an American audience.
I feel like if you went to a French article and it said "12 degrees" you would know to convert that to Fahrenheit, if you needed. And that's an even less common situation than second-language English speakers ending up on American articles.
I feel like if you went to a French article and it said "12 degrees" you would know to convert that to Fahrenheit, if you needed. And that's an even less common situation than second-language English speakers ending up on American articles.
How come specifically American, and how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site? A huge number of people speak English as a second language. Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically - moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
> with particularly dangerous temperatures forecasted for cities such as Chicago, New York, and Boston
> A heat dome that descended on Portland, Oregon,
> FastCompany is an American company
American companies tend to write for American audiences, especially when the article leads off with a bunch of American anecdotes.
If it was fastcompany.co.uk and it started off writing about how dangerous temperatures were going to be in London, and Liverpool, I would have assumed it was British.
The "intended audience" isn't just "people who can speak this language", and there are plenty of other context clues other than just "it's in English"
> A heat dome that descended on Portland, Oregon,
> FastCompany is an American company
American companies tend to write for American audiences, especially when the article leads off with a bunch of American anecdotes.
If it was fastcompany.co.uk and it started off writing about how dangerous temperatures were going to be in London, and Liverpool, I would have assumed it was British.
The "intended audience" isn't just "people who can speak this language", and there are plenty of other context clues other than just "it's in English"
> How come specifically American, and how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site?
It's a very popular publication in the United States and is a US company.
> A huge number of people speak English as a second language.
Yes, and if they're reading native articles, they're most certainly from the context of a small group of countries. It's not those nations' responsibility to make their articles accessible to every other nation simply because English is the most common second-language in the world.
> Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically
I'm in France at this moment and haven't lived in the US for over half a decade. I've never once seen a Celsius-based nation put "15c", nor any non-english publication do so. They write for their audiences, the same as American, British, Canadian, etc publications do.
> moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
Correct. The publication is written for Americans and is done so from that context. The scientific paper it is discussing is much more specific, as it should be.
It's a very popular publication in the United States and is a US company.
> A huge number of people speak English as a second language.
Yes, and if they're reading native articles, they're most certainly from the context of a small group of countries. It's not those nations' responsibility to make their articles accessible to every other nation simply because English is the most common second-language in the world.
> Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically
I'm in France at this moment and haven't lived in the US for over half a decade. I've never once seen a Celsius-based nation put "15c", nor any non-english publication do so. They write for their audiences, the same as American, British, Canadian, etc publications do.
> moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
Correct. The publication is written for Americans and is done so from that context. The scientific paper it is discussing is much more specific, as it should be.
>I've never once seen a Celsius-based nation put "15c", nor any non-english publication do so. They write for their audiences, the same as American, British, Canadian, etc publications do.
It's not the same. There's only 1 Fahrenheit-based nation, and that's the US. Every other nation uses Celsius. So all the others just take it for granted and use Celsius degrees, and assume everyone else will assume it's Celsius, because 95% of the world uses Celsius. So they aren't "writing for their [local] audience", they're writing for anyone who happens to read it, and assuming, like most of humanity, that the reader will automatically assume Celsius. The C/F issue only becomes apparent when dealing with American readers or publications.
It's not the same. There's only 1 Fahrenheit-based nation, and that's the US. Every other nation uses Celsius. So all the others just take it for granted and use Celsius degrees, and assume everyone else will assume it's Celsius, because 95% of the world uses Celsius. So they aren't "writing for their [local] audience", they're writing for anyone who happens to read it, and assuming, like most of humanity, that the reader will automatically assume Celsius. The C/F issue only becomes apparent when dealing with American readers or publications.
> There's only 1 Fahrenheit-based nation, and that's the US.
And when that nation's people write for their own people, that don't need to care about what the other nation's use. Period.
You're missing the main point in all of your grandstanding about America being different/unique in something. If you want to read American articles, it's on you to convert them. Just like Americans reading Die Welt, l'Republique, Xinhua. They don't owe you their audience just because 20% of the world speaks English.
And when that nation's people write for their own people, that don't need to care about what the other nation's use. Period.
You're missing the main point in all of your grandstanding about America being different/unique in something. If you want to read American articles, it's on you to convert them. Just like Americans reading Die Welt, l'Republique, Xinhua. They don't owe you their audience just because 20% of the world speaks English.
> how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site?
The first clue is the date, which is mm—dd-yyyy, only really used in the US.
Also, while not “from glancing”, the article speaks in the context of heat in US cities.
But yes, the author is likely taking for granted that non-US residents would read the article.
The first clue is the date, which is mm—dd-yyyy, only really used in the US.
Also, while not “from glancing”, the article speaks in the context of heat in US cities.
But yes, the author is likely taking for granted that non-US residents would read the article.
> But yes, the author is likely taking for granted that non-US residents would read the article.
Why should they need to? Should French journalists account for French-speaking Americans? What about German, Nigerian and Chinese ones?
The only reason this argument ever comes up is because English is the most common second-language spoken. American, British, Aussie, etc journalists have no more moral or reasonable responsibility to account for non-native/foreign audiences than any other nationalities do.
If you want to read a foreign publication, it's on you to deal with their local norms.
Why should they need to? Should French journalists account for French-speaking Americans? What about German, Nigerian and Chinese ones?
The only reason this argument ever comes up is because English is the most common second-language spoken. American, British, Aussie, etc journalists have no more moral or reasonable responsibility to account for non-native/foreign audiences than any other nationalities do.
If you want to read a foreign publication, it's on you to deal with their local norms.
>Should French journalists account for French-speaking Americans? What about German, Nigerian and Chinese ones?
They don't have to: French, Germans, Nigerians, and Chinese all use Celsius.
>The only reason this argument ever comes up is because English is the most common second-language spoken.
No, it only comes up because Americans are the only people who use Fahrenheit.
They don't have to: French, Germans, Nigerians, and Chinese all use Celsius.
>The only reason this argument ever comes up is because English is the most common second-language spoken.
No, it only comes up because Americans are the only people who use Fahrenheit.
> If you want to read a foreign publication, it's on you to deal with their local norms.
Every website clearly states what country it's in and who the target audience is. Except if it doesn't, in which case you know it's the Americans.
Please point to where in this article they mention this is written from/for France:
https://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2024/06/22/legislat...
Explicitly, not in the form of contextual clues (their domain name and language).
Correct, they do not. As the vast majority of published articles do not.
https://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2024/06/22/legislat...
Explicitly, not in the form of contextual clues (their domain name and language).
Correct, they do not. As the vast majority of published articles do not.
Fast Company is an American magazine. American business magazines, like Fortune, Forbes and Fast Company, write for a primarily American audience.
It's about a material that was developed in the United States and mentions several locations, all of which are in the United States.
That's a weak defense when its obviously beneficial for marketing to claim 16 of X, instead of 8 improvement. Which at the end isn't even that if I understood the claims correctly.
95% of the world population uses Celsius scale, all scientists and military use it too, and ignoring units when having bombastic claims is either negligence or more probably on purpose.
I am pretty sure the team (and subsequently company/companies) behind it is not limiting itself strictly to US market and willingly ignoring rest of the world, when there are countries with much bigger heat issues than US.
95% of the world population uses Celsius scale, all scientists and military use it too, and ignoring units when having bombastic claims is either negligence or more probably on purpose.
I am pretty sure the team (and subsequently company/companies) behind it is not limiting itself strictly to US market and willingly ignoring rest of the world, when there are countries with much bigger heat issues than US.
> all scientists and military use it too,
That's hardly true. Even if it was it's not a justification for forcing people to change their common parlance.
Also, if you really want a temperature scale, you'd have it referenced to absolute zero so it's an actual ratio quantity. So, a lot of "scientists" use Kelvin or in some cases Rankine.
> ignoring rest of the world
There's a conversion factor. We don't keep it secret. We're not "ignoring" the rest of the world, we're just operating in a mode that most convenient for us.
That's hardly true. Even if it was it's not a justification for forcing people to change their common parlance.
Also, if you really want a temperature scale, you'd have it referenced to absolute zero so it's an actual ratio quantity. So, a lot of "scientists" use Kelvin or in some cases Rankine.
> ignoring rest of the world
There's a conversion factor. We don't keep it secret. We're not "ignoring" the rest of the world, we're just operating in a mode that most convenient for us.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adl0653
>.. spectrally selective hierarchical fabric (SSHF) with emissivity greatly dominant in the atmospheric transmission window through molecular design, minimizing the net heat gain from the surroundings. The SSHF features a high solar spectrum reflectivity of 0.97 owing to strong Mie scattering from the nano-micro hybrid fibrous structure. The SSHF is 2.3°C cooler than a solar-reflecting broadband emitter when placed vertically in simulated outdoor urban scenarios during the day and also has excellent wearable properties.
>.. spectrally selective hierarchical fabric (SSHF) with emissivity greatly dominant in the atmospheric transmission window through molecular design, minimizing the net heat gain from the surroundings. The SSHF features a high solar spectrum reflectivity of 0.97 owing to strong Mie scattering from the nano-micro hybrid fibrous structure. The SSHF is 2.3°C cooler than a solar-reflecting broadband emitter when placed vertically in simulated outdoor urban scenarios during the day and also has excellent wearable properties.
It’s an American website, not a scientific paper. You see British publications using “stone,” when talking about body weight. Indian websites talk about “lakh” If you’re unhappy with the article, feel free to write your own. An American website has no obligation to cater to foreign audiences any more than a French website should be giving values in dollars or degrees Fahrenheit.
Forget the idiom and focus on the content itself.
Forget the idiom and focus on the content itself.
> 95% of the world population uses Celsius scale, all scientists and military use it too, and ignoring units when having bombastic claims is either negligence or more probably on purpose.
The article is written for an American layman audience. The scientific publication it is discussing uses specific terms, as it should. You would know this if you read passed the headline instead of knee-jerk complaining about "Americans wrong".
> I am pretty sure the team (and subsequently company/companies) behind it is not limiting itself strictly to US market and willingly ignoring rest of the world, when there are countries with much bigger heat issues than US.
FastCompany is an American publication and American company. Their audience is most certainly American. The fact that non-Americans can read it is no more important than French-speaking Americans being able to read Le Monde; a publication that also doesn't bother converting or specifying terms for a non-French audience.
The article is written for an American layman audience. The scientific publication it is discussing uses specific terms, as it should. You would know this if you read passed the headline instead of knee-jerk complaining about "Americans wrong".
> I am pretty sure the team (and subsequently company/companies) behind it is not limiting itself strictly to US market and willingly ignoring rest of the world, when there are countries with much bigger heat issues than US.
FastCompany is an American publication and American company. Their audience is most certainly American. The fact that non-Americans can read it is no more important than French-speaking Americans being able to read Le Monde; a publication that also doesn't bother converting or specifying terms for a non-French audience.
People use the units that are customary in their country, that's all there is to it. There's no need for some conspiracy theory.
Maybe it is, but HN has a broader audience and the title loses context when used here.
(Also, I think Fastco should realize that they're being read by English readers all over the world who only know Celsius, but I guess they do measure their audience.)
(Also, I think Fastco should realize that they're being read by English readers all over the world who only know Celsius, but I guess they do measure their audience.)
I also think there is not much more effort to type °C than °F, unless the writer isn't familiar with the topic.
(The article does include both units. It is only the title trying to be sensationalist)
(The article does include both units. It is only the title trying to be sensationalist)
But why? Does a French website use American units? It’s not that hard for them either right?
80% of people who can read the article are unfamiliar with Fahrenheit.
There is no need for anyone outside the USA and Canada to use Fahrenheit, ever.
There is no need for anyone outside the USA and Canada to use Fahrenheit, ever.
Le Monde should realize that French-speaking Americans/Canadians are reading their articles and make sure everything is written from that context.
Oh no they shouldn't, because that's idiotic; as it is for any national publication in any language. You want to read foreign articles, you deal with the conversions/idioms/colloquialisms/etc.
Oh no they shouldn't, because that's idiotic; as it is for any national publication in any language. You want to read foreign articles, you deal with the conversions/idioms/colloquialisms/etc.
There’s no harm in specifying the unit though.
I feel like the title should qualify th at this is 4⁰F.
It gets up to 16 versus more insulating fabric. I'm sure it is even more "cooling" compared to my winter jacket.
It gets up to 16 versus more insulating fabric. I'm sure it is even more "cooling" compared to my winter jacket.
It's 16F better than silk which is pretty breathable and not really all that insulating. It's probably better compared to cotton. It's 4F better than performance fabric for athletics which is probably a decent standin for best available cooling fabric for regular people.
8.89°C
Not 16 degrees Fahrenheit, but rather, 16 Fahrenheit degrees.
There is support for the OP's statement, in the case of Celsius at least [0], emphasis mine:
> Because of this dual usage, one must not rely upon the unit name or its symbol to denote that a quantity is a temperature interval; it must be unambiguous through context or explicit statement that the quantity is an interval. This is sometimes solved by using the symbol °C (pronounced "degrees Celsius") for a temperature, and C° (pronounced "Celsius degrees") for a temperature interval, although this usage is non-standard. Another way to express the same is "40 °C ± 3 K", which can be commonly found in literature.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsius#Temperatures_and_inter...
> Because of this dual usage, one must not rely upon the unit name or its symbol to denote that a quantity is a temperature interval; it must be unambiguous through context or explicit statement that the quantity is an interval. This is sometimes solved by using the symbol °C (pronounced "degrees Celsius") for a temperature, and C° (pronounced "Celsius degrees") for a temperature interval, although this usage is non-standard. Another way to express the same is "40 °C ± 3 K", which can be commonly found in literature.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsius#Temperatures_and_inter...
yet, 16 degrees Fahrenheit is how we would normally say it.
Really? Where are you from that they say it that way?
This is how modern roofing stackups work. They have a radiant heat barrier (layer) usually made from a thin foil shield attached to the roofing plywood. The only catch is you need a vented barrier below the foil to remove the heat. This is usually in the form of battons that are vented out to a ridge vent.
For this fabric to work, the third layer is acting like a thermal insulator - making sure the silver layer does not transfer the heat to your body.
For this fabric to work, the third layer is acting like a thermal insulator - making sure the silver layer does not transfer the heat to your body.
I wonder how it fares actually cooling the body. Does the fabric also block heat coming from the body wearing it?
Has anyone information on the fabric that was able to cool the body that Ars covered? https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/new-fabric-passively...
Has anyone information on the fabric that was able to cool the body that Ars covered? https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/new-fabric-passively...
There have been a lot of such materials over the years, but for some strange reason, none of them ever gets commercialized. We could have been using them all over the place, on all surfaces that expose to sunlight, but they're nowhere to be found.
From the things I've seen, it almost always comes down to IP issues clashing with economic realities. The person holding the rights either can't get it done and/or won't license it to people who can (at economically viable rates), so it languishes. It's especially frustrating since the whole IP system was supposed to encourage innovation.
Can you tell more about the things you've seen?
If no one offers enough money, perhaps their research found it's just a bunch of hot air and not actually a viable design.
If no one offers enough money, perhaps their research found it's just a bunch of hot air and not actually a viable design.
> If no one offers enough money, perhaps their research found it's just a bunch of hot air and not actually a viable design.
I won't go into specifics because none of them are my story to tell, and I don't have enough inside information to say with certainty anyway, but their research clearly showed it was not just a bunch of hot air, but the economic viability was mixed and often not there. In one case, it was only a marginal improvement over something that was already in high production, and the economies of scale made it so that this slightly better product would initially cost 100x more to produce, and even at moderate scale still 10x. My friend was offered some small amount (IIRC it was like $5,000) by some research firm to buy out the patent. He refused because he felt it was worth a lot more, but AFAIK it never ended up going anywhere. He (like the other cases) was inundated with (often conflicting) advice from a ton of angles, by many people who wanted to profit from the whole thing. It was pretty disheartening to watch. There was another one where a friend of a friend who was a professor discovered a way to improve efficiency in transmissions. They ended up raising substantial money but wanted too much to license out the IP to auto-makers, and the auto-makers walked. They ended up with essentially nothing and shortly afterward an even better CV transmission was discovered/invented, rendering his design obsolete anyway.
I won't go into specifics because none of them are my story to tell, and I don't have enough inside information to say with certainty anyway, but their research clearly showed it was not just a bunch of hot air, but the economic viability was mixed and often not there. In one case, it was only a marginal improvement over something that was already in high production, and the economies of scale made it so that this slightly better product would initially cost 100x more to produce, and even at moderate scale still 10x. My friend was offered some small amount (IIRC it was like $5,000) by some research firm to buy out the patent. He refused because he felt it was worth a lot more, but AFAIK it never ended up going anywhere. He (like the other cases) was inundated with (often conflicting) advice from a ton of angles, by many people who wanted to profit from the whole thing. It was pretty disheartening to watch. There was another one where a friend of a friend who was a professor discovered a way to improve efficiency in transmissions. They ended up raising substantial money but wanted too much to license out the IP to auto-makers, and the auto-makers walked. They ended up with essentially nothing and shortly afterward an even better CV transmission was discovered/invented, rendering his design obsolete anyway.
Thanks. Fascinating story.
It looks like the market worked but of course subject to human greed and such. Auto makers didn't see enough value to justify the expense. If it was something radical then presumably everyone would have a big enough piece...
It looks like the market worked but of course subject to human greed and such. Auto makers didn't see enough value to justify the expense. If it was something radical then presumably everyone would have a big enough piece...
That's not at all what the parent comment is saying.
Also, such materials are real.
Also, such materials are real.
> That's not at all what the parent comment is saying.
That's what I'm saying. It's how discussion works, he said one thing, I said something different.
> Also, such materials are real.
Real but not feasible for any reason. The other commenter didn't give any info that would deny that. You didn't, too. I don't blame you, it would take non trivial amount of time and money to just understand if an idea doesn't work out in real world. Maybe manufacturing too expensive, maybe there's some blocking regulation, maybe health hazards for workers, environmental hazards... But yeah of course a random guy on HN knows for sure it's the IP law that's always ruining things. Who would care about potential drawbacks of some tech, we got PFAS into blood of probably everyone now so why stop there?
That's what I'm saying. It's how discussion works, he said one thing, I said something different.
> Also, such materials are real.
Real but not feasible for any reason. The other commenter didn't give any info that would deny that. You didn't, too. I don't blame you, it would take non trivial amount of time and money to just understand if an idea doesn't work out in real world. Maybe manufacturing too expensive, maybe there's some blocking regulation, maybe health hazards for workers, environmental hazards... But yeah of course a random guy on HN knows for sure it's the IP law that's always ruining things. Who would care about potential drawbacks of some tech, we got PFAS into blood of probably everyone now so why stop there?
Probably because they're impossibly hard or expensive to manufacture at scale and nobody was willing to front the money to kickstart the research to commercialize.
"Silver nanowires" is probably the limiting factor on this one. Silver isn't that rare but it's certainly not cheap compared to normal textile fibers.
Also probably a skin and lung irritant. Lots of people have contact allergies to macroscale silver and nanowires tend to get embedded in cells in soft tissue.
Regarding nanowires, for what it's worth, nano silver is used as a highly effective antimicrobial skin cream, and none of its users complain of an allergy. In this way it also accelerates wound healing. It is even more benign than some skin antibiotics that trigger an allergy. Given this evidence, I don't think nanoscale use of silver in clothing is going to be a a concern for the vast majority of people.
Disclaimer: Silver is a slight poison and should not be used for a prolonged duration.
Disclaimer: Silver is a slight poison and should not be used for a prolonged duration.
>and none of its users complain of an allergy.
I have a hard time imagining that's true for any material, ever.
I have a hard time imagining that's true for any material, ever.
I think the concern is about when the clothing starts falling apart and nanowires end up in the air of your room and eventually your lungs/stomach, like nanoplastics cross into tissue and individual cells, accumulate, turn up in sperm/placenta etc.
It turns out that some small amount of nano silver is perfectly manageable by the body, although I make no claim for the lungs. People even apply or drink it as an antimicrobial medicine without issue. It's when they take too much silver over time that it becomes an issue.
The key is "nano wires". What we drink and eat gets pooped out and doesn't permeate organ tissue and cells. Nano stuff does.
Upon further research, it turns out that nano silver gradually accumulates in the brain and the testes. It is otherwise eliminated from the body, but not so easily from these organs. As such, it is not safe for long-term exposure.
References:
Accumulation of Silver Nanoparticles in Brain and Testes during Long-Term Ingestion to Mammals (2017)
Disturbance in Mammalian Cognition Caused by Accumulation of Silver in Brain (2021) (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
References:
Accumulation of Silver Nanoparticles in Brain and Testes during Long-Term Ingestion to Mammals (2017)
Disturbance in Mammalian Cognition Caused by Accumulation of Silver in Brain (2021) (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
As I understand, the body has mechanisms to safely eliminate some low amount of nano silver. I don't know if the exposure from this material as clothing would exceed any safe threshold.
1) human body doesn't use silver. At all. Which means it accumulates over lifetime.
2) nano means it is not subject to elimination by food pipeline. It will cross into tissue and stay there, addition only.
2) nano means it is not subject to elimination by food pipeline. It will cross into tissue and stay there, addition only.
> human body doesn't use silver. At all. Which means it accumulates over lifetime.
The human body has diverse ways to excrete things many that it doesn't use, namely by urine, stools, sweat, and bile. Kidneys, liver, and intestines specialize in it.
<<Up to a point, excess silver is excreted out>>, although other things like various forms of PFAS are not.
The human body has diverse ways to excrete things many that it doesn't use, namely by urine, stools, sweat, and bile. Kidneys, liver, and intestines specialize in it.
<<Up to a point, excess silver is excreted out>>, although other things like various forms of PFAS are not.
All of those things you described happen in food pipeline, something nano size that could even come through your lungs would cross into soft tissue and individual cells and live there forever never to be excreted, again see microplastic in sperm and placenta
Upon further research, it turns out that nano silver gradually accumulates in the brain and the testes. It is otherwise eliminated from the body, but not so easily from these organs. As such, it is not safe for long-term exposure.
References:
Accumulation of Silver Nanoparticles in Brain and Testes during Long-Term Ingestion to Mammals (2017)
Disturbance in Mammalian Cognition Caused by Accumulation of Silver in Brain (2021) (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
References:
Accumulation of Silver Nanoparticles in Brain and Testes during Long-Term Ingestion to Mammals (2017)
Disturbance in Mammalian Cognition Caused by Accumulation of Silver in Brain (2021) (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
[deleted]
The two main problems are how to manufacture them at scale, and how durable they are.
A thin outer layer on your clothing tends to get fairly rough treatment. Think about sitting down, then scooting your butt back. How much force was that? Amd if this is anywhere other than the outer layer, it won't work as well.
A thin outer layer on your clothing tends to get fairly rough treatment. Think about sitting down, then scooting your butt back. How much force was that? Amd if this is anywhere other than the outer layer, it won't work as well.
https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/energy-conservation-us/applicati...
3M sells them for grocery store roofs in the US.
3M sells them for grocery store roofs in the US.
It said they compared it to “broadband emitter fabric” which sounds like it is commercialized? I don’t know what the common name for that is though.
"impossibly thin" sounds a lot like "very fragile and therefore completely impractical for things that you want fabrics for".
Or maybe we now want to fill the world and coat our bodies in nanoscale plastic and silver dust?
Or maybe we now want to fill the world and coat our bodies in nanoscale plastic and silver dust?
> very fragile
Thin can always be made thicker by adding layers, but thick cannot similarly be made thinner. Thin is a feature.
Thin can always be made thicker by adding layers, but thick cannot similarly be made thinner. Thin is a feature.
> There is no mention of plastic here.
The use of plastics here is mentioned as early as the second paragraph. It's the outer layer at least so at least it's better than normal microplastics on skin from plastic fiber abrasion. Still a bit of a problem once it hits the wash though.
The use of plastics here is mentioned as early as the second paragraph. It's the outer layer at least so at least it's better than normal microplastics on skin from plastic fiber abrasion. Still a bit of a problem once it hits the wash though.
[deleted]
If the difference between two numbers in Celsius is Kelvin, what unit is the difference between two numbers in Fahrenheit?
Rankine.
Fahrenheit. When subtracting two quantities the result has the same unit, we just use Kelvin because it's the appropriate SI unit.
We can't use Kelvin for Fahrenheit differences though. That only works for Celsius. Kelvin is Celsius with absolute zero. Fahrenheit with absolute zero is Rankine.
The other guy who responded to the parent is right. The absolute scale for measuring the difference between two Fahrenheit degrees is Rankine.
Just for the sake of sheer pedantry. The scale for measuring the _ratio_ is Rankine. You can measure differences with an _ordinal_ scale, which is what Celsius and Fahrenheit are.
For even more pedantry, Celsius and Fahrenheit aren't just ordinal scales. They are called interval scales, which lie between ordinal and ratio scales:
> Another typical example is the Celsius scale, which is divided into 100 equal degree sections between the freezing and boiling points of water. Unlike the intervals in nominal and ordinal scales, it is possible to make calculations with individual data points in interval scales. The difference in temperature between 10°C and 20°C is the same distance as between 40°C and 50°C. In contrast to ratio scales, interval scales lack a natural zero point. In the case of the Celsius temperature scale, '0°C' is an arbitrarily chosen zero point (whereas the Kelvin temperature scale begins at the absolute zero point with 0K (-273.15°C/-459.67°F). Multiplications with an interval scale are therefore not useful. While it is true for the Kelvin ratio scale that 100K defines double the heat energy in a mass as 50K, this is not true for 50°C/100°C.
https://www.statista.com/statistics-glossary/definition/320/...
> Another typical example is the Celsius scale, which is divided into 100 equal degree sections between the freezing and boiling points of water. Unlike the intervals in nominal and ordinal scales, it is possible to make calculations with individual data points in interval scales. The difference in temperature between 10°C and 20°C is the same distance as between 40°C and 50°C. In contrast to ratio scales, interval scales lack a natural zero point. In the case of the Celsius temperature scale, '0°C' is an arbitrarily chosen zero point (whereas the Kelvin temperature scale begins at the absolute zero point with 0K (-273.15°C/-459.67°F). Multiplications with an interval scale are therefore not useful. While it is true for the Kelvin ratio scale that 100K defines double the heat energy in a mass as 50K, this is not true for 50°C/100°C.
https://www.statista.com/statistics-glossary/definition/320/...
Are we now just in the timeline where David Bowie's https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Fell_to_Earth happens?
p51-remorse(1)
[deleted]
These are certainly impressive numbers!