Talk:Diamond

Overall quality

I came here looking for something simple - the thermal conductivity of crystalline and poly crystalline diamond. I didn't find an accurate number for that in the article (the citation says that the highest measured thermal conductivity is 410 W/m.k, not the 900-2300 W/m.k written in the article), but I did notice that the overall quality of this article is very poor, there are grammar mistakes throughout, many citations are not primary or even reputable sources (citing a knife exporter for chemical stability of diamond?!), and the general writing style is casual and unprofessional. I don't edit Wikipedia with an account, so I cannot clean this up. Would someone please take some time to go through and edit this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.67.194.93 (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

| I would like to add some possible changes to improve the wording. Under the Cutting section, the phrase "Unlike cutting, which is a responsible but quick operation" seems odd. I suggest changing it to "Unlike cutting, which is a critical but quick operation". Other possibilites include "demanding" or "exacting". Asknapp (talk) 21:21, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Help

there are 2 words that are stuck together, when I add a space between them it deletes the space but the edit shows up under the history Scientific Alan (talk) 01:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

What words? I saw one you fixed and I added another missing space. Vsmith (talk) 02:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Proceess of a diamond — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.82.172.59 (talk) 01:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Spelling

For "Valuation Wholesale, discounted and cheaper diamonds are of lower value. Some indicators that lowers a diamond's value are when the diamond is not natural such as heat or clarity enhanced or synethic." can we please have "Valuation Wholesale, discounted and cheaper diamonds are of lower value. Some indicators that lower a diamond's value are when the diamond is not natural, such as heat enhanced or clarity enhanced, or is synthetic."

203.97.123.30 (talk) 02:03, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

This article on DIAMOND is "semi-protected" because the diamond industry has PAID WIKIPEDIA NOT TO ALLOW the truthful details to be posted in this article.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Industrial-grade diamonds

Industrial diamonds are valued mostly for their hardness and thermal conductivity, making many of the gemological characteristics of diamonds, such as the 4 Cs, irrelevant for most applications. This helps explain why 80% of mined diamonds (equal to about 135,000,000 carats (27,000 kg) annually), unsuitable for use as gemstones, are destined for industrial use.

Mining

Approximately 130,000,000 carats (26,000 kg) of diamonds are mined annually, with a total value of nearly US$9 billion, and about 100,000 kg (220,000 lb) are synthesized annually.[76]

CHECK OUT THE NUMBERS!! THEY DON'T MAKE SENSE! "80% of mined diamonds (equal to about 135,000,000 carats (27,000 kg) annually), unsuitable for use as gemstones, are destined for industrial use" COMPARED to "Approximately 130,000,000 carats (26,000 kg) of diamonds are mined annually" !!!

"THEIR OWN LIES SHOW THEM UP ! " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.36.157.142 (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

THAT is why this page is semi-protected...121.127.222.230 (talk) 02:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I am certain they have hired people for PR purposes and that would include editing wikipedia like most companies do, but I don't think they paid wikipedia directly. You never know though. Anyway the sentence with the number of blood diamonds at 2-3% needs to state the source in the sentence. Citing the very people who cause these problems and profit from the problems as saying there are not many problems is just stupid. It should read "according to the (gay little acronym) blood diamonds make up x percent". Oh yeah also its fifteen fucking years old so yeah. Put a time line on it. This article has been a huge dispute for years now and it won't end any time soon but come on.... clean it up a little please. It's too obvious as propaganda. Also as the previous commenter stated the numbers thoughout this ENTIRE article are made up and thrown together randomly. Sometimes two sentences apart. Preceding comment made by 98.155.55.68 (talk) - Please remember to sign your comments --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Gramophone Needles

Does anybody know how big a part of industrial-grade diamonds are used for gramophone styli? One per million...? Harjasusi (talk) 16:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Phase diagram description, "hatched areas indicate metastable states"

The phase diagram for carbon seems to derive from the following website:

http://sciexplorer.blogspot.com/2012/09/non-silicate-gems.html

The hatched areas in the diagram indicate metastable states, wherein (say) carbon can exist with graphite, even though the one (or the other) is less stable. Over aeons, the less stable, "metastable", state gradually decays, into the stable state. Thus, near the metastable border regions, graphite <--> diamond can convert back and forth (perhaps according to some kind of Boltzmann energy level population equation, n ~ e^-ΔE/kT ?? 66.235.38.214 (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Diamond-spewing eruptions derive from deeper magma chambers, where-with-in Pressures are higher. According to the carbon phase diagram, higher Pressures would keep diamonds, dredged up from depth, closer to the diamond/graphite phase transition, and "deeper" within the "hatched region" on the plot, where diamond remains metastable (only slowing "decaying" into graphite). Plausibly, diamond is more (meta-)stable at higher Pressures, and so "decays" more slowly. Perhaps the diamond-relevant difference, between normal eruptions, and volcanic pipe eruptions, is that the higher Pressures, in the magma chambers, of the latter, preserve diamonds longer, so that more diamonds remain as larger crystals, in their erupted lavas?? If so, then eruptions which occur more quickly, would leave less time, for metastable diamonds to "decay"; whereas potentially supra-normally super-large crystals of diamond possibly exist, at depth, have grown to considerable size there, without having "erosively decayed" (ablating from their surfaces), in shallower magma chambers, whilst awaiting delivery, to earth's surface?? 66.235.38.214 (talk) 22:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The spontaneous conversion of dense diamond "popping out" into graphite, at lower pressures, resembles the spontaneous conversion of Olivine (e.g. (FeO)₂SiO₂) to Pyroxene plus oxides (FeO)SiO₂ + FeO). Apparently, pressure can crush molecules together; and reducing pressure allows them to "pop back apart", in sort of a "molecular fission" process. Perhaps, extrapolating, to nuclear fission processes, the intense pressures, inside immense stars, allow elements heavier than iron to be "metastable"?? Perhaps, arguing from analogy, that would require pressures on the nuclei themselves, i.e. nuclear densities, characteristic only of relativistically-compact objects, e.g. Neutron Stars?? So, perhaps by the time nuclear densities are reached, all the electrons have been crushed into protons, generating neutronized, neutron-degenerate material, in which no chemical elements (everything is neutrons) can even exist.66.235.38.214 (talk) 20:18, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Another analogy would be the Pressure-induced phase changes, from Spinel ( (MgO)(Al₂O₃) ) to Garnet ( (MgO)₃(Al₂O₃)(SiO₂)₃ ).66.235.38.214 (talk) 21:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Inexpertly, "metastable" states seem described, with language, implying that they have "half-lives", as if the analogy of "molecular fission" were appropriate.66.235.38.214 (talk) 20:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The afore-cited "sci-explorer" website says, that most gems form, at the Crust-Mantle interface, i.e. the MOHO. Perhaps, by analogy, deeper-forming diamonds crystalize and grow, at the interface, between the solid Lithosphere mantle material above, and the still-molten mantle material below?? 66.235.38.214 (talk) 20:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Inexpertly, the article could clarify, that "diamond formation" (slow crystal growth at depth) and "diamond delivery" (to surface) are unrelated phenomena (?). In some places, at some times, diamonds grow to macroscopic scales, down at deep depths. And, some times, those diamond formations are later blasted to the surface, by another "delivery elevator process", which dredges up all manner of xenocrysts and xenoliths, some small fraction of which, are diamonds. Presumably, too, those xenocrysts are scoured from the all depths, from deep diamond bearing regions (≤200km), all the way on up (?). If so, then perhaps the article could clarify that, more. 66.235.38.214 (talk) 21:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Slight grammatical error

There is a small grammatic mistake where formation temperature is described; it is stated that it will form "at a comparatively low temperature range between approximately 900–1300 °C (1652–2372 °F)."

I would re-phrase this as "at a comparatively low temperature range - approximately 900–1300 °C (1652–2372 °F)." OR I would re-phrase this as "at a comparatively low temperature range between approximately 900 and 1300 °C (1652 and 2372 °F)."

But I may well be being 'nitpicky'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.204.85 (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree to bring this minor inconsistency of formatting in line with the remainder of the article. As proposed

Please Change Current Text

"at a comparatively low temperature range between approximately 900–1300 °C (1652–2372 °F)."

TO
"at a comparatively low temperature range between approximately 900 and 1300 °C (1652 and 2372 °F)."

Jcislowski (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Done Minor edit only. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Chemical stability

" A diamond's surface can only be oxidized a little by just a few oxidants[which?] at high temperature (below 1000 °C). " This statement is from a cited source and is in fact contradictory if read against the facts from the source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond#cite_note-DBS-23 ... <-- above statement from the linked source

The statement regarding ignition point states that it is present in oxygen an oxidant and air which contains the oxidant oxygen. And with the temperatures below 1000C this source covers all but the "a little" part of this statement. You could say we have a verifiable piece here, but i believe the source and the context of its usage leave a lot to be desired.

I find the statement to be overall incomplete and lacking perspective to the surrounding subject matter and suggest it be reworded or removed. As in its current form and intent its a total fact hack. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond#cite_note-22

Jcislowski (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Suspect materials as oxidizers include nitric acid, fluorine, hydrogen fluoride, permanganate ion, hydrogen peroxide, liquid oxygen. Substances that can oxidize graphite just might oxidize diamond. As reducing substances? Alkali and alkaline-earth metals. Those metals reduce carbon as coke or graphite to acetylides. Pbrower2a (talk) 22:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Green from radiation exposure

In the introduction, there is stated: "Small amounts of defects [...] color diamond [...] green (radiation exposure), [...]." I question this claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.144 (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

What exactly do you question? That diamonds are affected by naturally occurring radioactive minerals? That radiation can induce color in diamonds? Or that "green" does not adequately characterize the kind of color-changes that can occur? Zyxwv99 (talk) 01:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Diamond is no longer the hardest naturally occuring material.

In the hardness subsection of "material properties" I noticed that the first sentence said "diamond is the hardest known natural material". In fact there are two materials now known to be harder then diamond. Those are wurtzite boron nitride and lonsdaleite.

Wurtzite boron nitride occurs naturally after very powerful volcanic events and is up to 18% harder then diamond because it's atoms of boron and nitrogen are even more powerfully bonded. It has no facets and therefore has no strange facet differences like lonsdaleite. It has a hardness of 114 Gpa compared to diamond's 97 Gpa.

However, the hardest naturally occuring substance is lonsdaleite which occurs naturally when an asteroid containing large amounts of graphite hits the Earth. The force of the impact changes the graphite into a substance similar to diamond but with the crystal structure of graphite giving it superior hardness then diamond by up to 58% on certain facets but on others it is weaker then diamond, leaving it open for debate.

I thought this was common knowledge. It comes up on tests a lot with the younger generation. (That's why us older folks need to keep up with the latest discoveries.) Of course diamond is still the hardest substance the average person is likely to encounter, but yeah, that should be in the article. Zyxwv99 (talk) 03:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Diamond thermal conductivity

i think diamond's thermal conductivity should be added to the diamond characteristics chart under "identification". it is listed somewhere in the article as: thermal conductivity 900–2,320 W·m−1·K−1 (current citation number 20) i was going to add it but i figured i'd discuss it here first.Among Men (talk) 01:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Citation needed

"Excellent optical and mechanical properties, notably unparalleled hardness and durability, make diamond the most popular gemstone." Whether or not it's the most popular gemstone, which also should have a citation, there should be a citation(and perhaps an explanation) for the cause of the popularity being caused by its optical and mechanicalproperties, esp the unparalleled hardness blah blah, which was mentioned before, which sounds like a real estateadvertisement.76.218.104.120 (talk) 21:53, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

From the introduction: "...renowned for superlative physical properties"?

It depends what you are using it for. It wouldn't be superlative talcum powder. So this is a pov issue.76.218.104.120 (talk) 21:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The whole lede needs work. First it should distinguish between the rock and the mineral. Hardness was an issue in ancient times and the Middle Ages. Gems were commonly used as armor (jade) or as supplemental armoring. They were usually unfaceted, cut en cabochon or polished in a tumbler. Diamonds would not have been very effective, but people also wore gems as personal adornment, partly in the belief that they could ward off back luck and evil spirits. That's why diamonds were so highly prized: if they could scratch other gems, which in turn could protect warriors, then they must have had powerful magic. Today few people care how their jewelry rates on the Moh's hardness scale.

Diamonds are generally opaque, ranging in color from dark brown to light brown. The 2% that are gem-quality are mostly color P-Z, with no individual letter grade, and a split clarity grade: I2-3. Since most gem-quality diamonds are uncertified and the FTC (at least in the USA) says a jeweler's report need only be accurate to within one grade, it follows that most gem-quality diamonds are actually color ZZ, clarity I4. Which is to say, opaque to translucent, ranging in color from medium brown to light brown. Since most are only slightly larger than a grain of sand, people can't see how dark and deeply flawed they are. They also can't see that the diamond cutter was in too much of a hurry to cut all 17 facets on the "single cut," or to try to make them even remotely symmetrical.

If we're talking about diamonds that cost thousands of dollars, such as for engagement rings, the color is still likely to be off by a bit, as well as the clarity. That's because many people really want a 1-carat diamond, but couldn't afford one if it wasn't a little off color, with flaws that can hardly be seen at arm's length.

Zyxwv99 (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Diamonds in minecraft

someone add something about diamond tools in Minecraft — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.176.127 (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Flawless Diamonds

There seem to be some discrepancies. seems to say that there are quite a few flawless diamonds, some quite large. Yet says that it is the world's only flawless diamond.

David aiken (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

The claim in the article Strawn-Wagner_Diamond is not supported by the reference. The article merely says that it's a one-in-a-billion diamond, which is probably true. However, you can buy one-in-a-billions like that on Blue Nile for about $23,000 for a 1-carat specimen (http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=DiamondSearchRD#diamonds_pid=LD03727989), $93,000 for 2 carats (http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=DiamondSearchRD). This raises serious notability questions about the entire article. After all, if I owned a roadside stand out in the desert selling snacks and souvenirs, and had my mint-condition '57 T-bird parked out front as an attention-getter, I could write a Wikipedia article about my car, saying that it's a one-in-a-billion car. The claim could be entirely true. After all, how many '57 T-birds are there in mint condition? Zyxwv99 (talk) 23:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2014

Please change the contraction "it's" to the possessive pronoun "its" in both places where it appears in the final paragraph of the "History" introduction:

...these are carat (it's weight), cut (quality of the cut is graded according to proportions, symmetry and polish), color (how close to white or colorless; For fancy diamonds how intense is it's Hue)...

Also, the word "Hue" is capitalized unnecessarily as it appears above.

Chorkman (talk) 04:41, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Done and thanks for the eye Cannolis (talk) 05:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Origin of diamonds

Reasonably authoritative sources seem to disagree as to whether a good majority of diamonds are harzburgitic, or rather most are eclogitic. Is this currently an open question? Or is there actually a consensus which i have not found? Colin McLarty (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Mining

What do you use to mine diamond? -- Annonymus user (talk) 03:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2015

I would respectfully suggest that the sentence "Carbon-containing minerals provide the carbon source, and the growth occurs over periods from 1 billion to 3.3 billion years (25% to 75% of the age of the Earth)" be removed as this is not observable, provable or a scientific statement of fact. It is merely a theory that the age of the earth is more than approximately 6000 years. Thank you for your consideration.

216.36.187.203 (talk) 00:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

See Age of the Earth. Stickee (talk) 02:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Diamond cutting and polishing -- edit request

The article states that in 2004 90%+ of diamonds were cut in Surat. Over the last decade there have been huge changes in the diamond processing industry. China is now a strong second place contender. I have edited the the diamond cutting article with this edition:

Diamonds are cut and polished in Surat, India and the Chinese cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen. India in recent years has held between 19-31% of the world market in polished diamonds and China has held 17% of the world market share in a recent year.

Please update this article with 2013-14 data mentioned above.

Tippedcone (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2015

you should tell us how much diamonds cost — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BC03:A140:60F9:AE92:548A:27B2 (talk) 11:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 Not done: The price of diamonds can vary by region. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 11:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: The price is dependant on multiple factors; there is no one price. NiciVampireHeart 13:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2015

Please change

Cutting centers with lower cost of labor, notably Surat in Gujarat, India, handle a larger number of smaller carat diamonds, while smaller quantities of larger or more valuable diamonds are more likely to be handled in Europe or North America.

to

Cutting centers with lower cost of skilled labor and Highest Technologies for Diamond Manufacturing , notably Surat in Gujarat, India, handle a larger number of both smaller & bigger carat diamonds, while very small quantities of larger or more valuable diamonds are still handled in South Africa , Botswana , Europe and North America.

Utpal Mistry 09:54, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as your proposal does not seem a neutral point of view and more importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Diamond's surface

This article merely discusses the hydro-phobic\phillic properties of the surface of a diamond; It does not mention the physico-chemical properties there - are there C=C double bonds at the Diamond-Air interface? If so, surely cutting a diamond would be changing these bonds? Le Sanglier des Ardennes (talk) 02:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2015

klik batu

125.164.20.119 (talk) 10:08, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 12:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2015

First paragraph under "Material properties", third to last last word should be "tetrahedral", not "tetrhedral". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterfairfield (talk • contribs) 00:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Vsmith (talk) 01:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Mon programme d'enseignement à Wikipédia demon école diamond

les promesses du contrôle quantiques - j'introduisitle faitde la division par deux les temps le hégelianisme méditait sur le mo,ment negative et le lfait mediatize zerodeviding in jouillot's search et l'indivision l'horloge astronomique de Strasbourg l'indivision et l'atome depuis Democritus calculer le tempp de lamo,tée avec des itiniraires contraire à l'intuition notamment le programme américan Apollo le programme manhatan afin de tomber sur des trajectoires minimisant avec un optimumlla consummation du carburant afin d'atteindre notre satellite naturel je note que structuredfortran 77 programming fut appliqué dans les satellite après l'atterissage sur la lunemoon landing il commence par identifier une introduction génerale de nature the zero absolute et l'étrangeté quantique les quarks montrent جدور كسرية les probabilité que les maths inspirré dumondematériel et la reference engelz sesilustres quotions géometriques en matière de son approche sur le darwinisme l'histoire que je prétendqu'elleest positive de signe en méditant sur la conscience de la matière axe sur night journey evenement dote desingularité et levariable energiequelle lecture à la lumière de ma dernièresynthèse lecontrôle quantiquey soit iimpliquée meme lamathématique afin de concevoir des calculs performants des algorithlmes ondin pour calculer pâques la logique de transposer les idées du contrôle optimal du dogmeclassique aun dogme de revolution ledogmequantique et la catastrophe ultraviolette nottament laloi planck incite à recourirà une mathématique trés performente il fallai attendre le development decalculs satisfaisant la condition puissance je diraisla mathematique del'infini un abstrait puissant afin de realizer certains oobjectifs" souligne Dominique sugny je vouspropose un ours de phiosophie scientifique que jeconsidére comme un cours delogique un support sous theme" critique de karlpopper du positivism " k popper naissance fut à vienne et remonte à 1902 il értudia lamathematique etlaphilosophie il rédiga son livre" lalogique dela recherché scientifique "ou la logique de la découverte scientifique " selon la traduction anglaise il a pubkllié en 1934 PARMIS UNE SUITE QUIL FUT SON CHEF R2DACTEUR PARMIS des figures du cercle deviebnne il a contrarier tant deleursthéses et approaches en 1937 il fut élu un professeurr dans uncentre universitaire en newzealind il lui fallu attendre l'anée 1945 pour passer à une université d'économie à londre entant que professeur de la logiqueet la method scientifique l'apparition du cercledevienne remonte à 1929 par lapublication de "lacompréhension scientifique du monde " mshlek l'aconsiderer colmme un point dechangement definitive dans l'histoire de la philosophie hind labdag hindou2007@yahoo.fr école diamond www.hindou2007.wix.com/diamond-school — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.251.110.162 (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour. Je parle le français assez bien, mais certains utilisateurs ne peuvent pas vous comprendre. Puis-je vous aider? Merci pour les références. Ches (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Diamond. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.gjepc.org/solitaire/magazines/Aug05_Sep05/aug05_sep05.aspx?inclpage=Specials&section_id=3
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.allbusiness.com/retail-trade/apparel-accessory-stores-womens-specialty/4224156-1.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.debeersgroup.com/en/Exploration-and-mining/Mining-operations/
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.un.org/peace/africa/Diamond.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2004/10/18/featuresbusiness/hjjfijicjbhdjc.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

la science géométrique entre la science et la philosophie

ce cours s'insére dansla cadre de l'étude de la geometrie entant que quantumcontinum depuis talhèse en 16ème siècle jusqu'au 19éme siècle c'est une recherché bréve qui vise d'appréhender lecôté épistymilogiqe historique et dialectique le jargon de l'évolution de la géometrie esce que c'est abordé d'une manière cumulative donc je vais essayer d'éntamer une recherché sur la géometrie entre les cractères discontinue et lecaraxtère discret qu'elles sont les fondements de la géometrie dans ses divers étapes sezs methods qu'est ce quirelèvede la revolution dans cet historique de la géometrie qu'elle sont les apports de l'épistymologie notamment l'épistymologiemoderne ? - l'art de conformité ou du conformiseme alors qu'émergerent les vagues de lagéometrie rimanniène ? après que poinccarier a démontré l'équivalention logiqueentre géometrie alors que depuis 1920 il est devenu possible d'estimer lesphénomènes reels physique à l'échele atomique laser microprocesseur GPS MAGERIE PAR resonance magnétique ces avancées n'ont pu vir le jours sans la mécanique quantique "mais aussi importantes soient -ells ces applications s'appuient seulementsur une comprehension passive des loisquantiques note Dominique sugny du laboratoire interdisciplinaire carnot de Bourgogne Dijon et de l'institute for advanced studies demunich en Allemagne désiormais les chercheurs veulent aller plus loint pour un meilleur contrôle lecontrôlequantique ayant comme objectif la manipulation des atomes des phtoton ou autres electron pour améliorerleur fonctionnalité en ce qui concerne lecalcul quantic EPFL avec la miniaturization soit l'ajustement de volumes en matière nucléaire des pc nous some à reviser des paradigmes du calculclasique entre le fondamentalisme physique le géni newton et le savoir quantique se situe la fleche croissant de la catastrophe ultraviolette l'histoire des quantas pour developer des modéles decalcul quantic le bit quantique informatique quantique le sous-domaine informatique y soit impliquée alogique de l'arborescence le web soit un espace virtuel de hierarchisation algorithmique par opposition au phénoomènes del'électricité traiant descalculateurs quantiques recouranttoujours à la mécanique quantique entre le géni debrogli et le géni shrodenger notamment pour l'informatique dite classique les phénomènes quantiquues utilizes sont l'intrication quantique et la superposition -àsuivre- hindou2007@yahoo.fr -hindou2007.WIX.com/diamond-school — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.250.198.175 (talk) 10:52, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

la géométrie entre lascience et la philosophie-

comalogie ou consdcience de lamatière axe sur night journey et l'énergie l'histoire un probabilisme dansle temps l'etat zro pi+et pi- SOIT UNESYmétrie du temps les bits et l'état zeo le zero et l'algorithme selon alkawarizmi c'est le qu'bits en meme temps dans unétat zero les limité de probabilities en matière mathématique je vous présente cette recherché modélisation numèrique -algorithme conscience virtuelle programme nucléaire commerésultat de cette recherché la simulation numèrique modéle physique la synthèse par modélisation physique consiiste en la production des sons à partird'un modèle informatique la descrition de proprieties physique la personne physique et la personne numèrique la mécanisation des tâches et le processus de numèrisation de simulation d'un phénomène ^physique c'est pour evaluee la cinétiquela vibration ou oscilliation des objets mouvementés ou stimulé la differentialté libenztienne et le modèle Sartre en communication c'est entre les réalité mentales et la réalités lesréalités reels les premières selon libentzsont necassaires se nase sur le fonctionnnement de l'intellect dans sion image logique libentz expression fut la suivante " l'originedes réalités necassaires c'est l'intellect si l'on recours à desmodélesélemntaires que l'on recontre comme expertise quotidiennes ce qui serait prouver ou rassurer desexemple jedirais des modèles il fautcerner son seuil de rigueur ou de crédibilité par l'intellect lui meme " pour aborder broxt en sociologiepicon et legéni de l'induction l'hypotheticodeductives'avére plus valuable pour dévolppr lessciences atomiques entant que methods de recherché le fondamentalisme philosophique supposait que les principes de l'intellect avaient des fondements stables etnon pas variables je vous présentecette recherche python - computing logicz - programmec nucléareks3 entant que résultat Boolean logic désignant un programme y soit impliquéela formed l'algebra que j'oppose à la géometrie l'utilisation simple decompraisons danlesquels les valeurssoientsoient correctes ou fausses je note expressioimplique equals Boolean equal quivalent les fluctuations ca rappellent energetiques hind labdaghindou2007@yahoo.fr - www.hindou2007.wix.com/diamond-school — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.250.198.175 (talk) 11:33, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2016

The source link for reference 100 "Pisani, Bob (August 27, 2012). "The Business of Diamonds, From Mining to Retail". CNBC." links to a yahoo finance search instead of directly to CNBC. A direct link to CNBC should be supplied instead. It is: http://www.cnbc.com/id/48782968

Starbrow (talk) 09:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Done!!! The link is dead as well, and this is why I wanted to change it too. DSCrowned^(talk) 14:05, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2016

The article states that in 2004 90%+ of diamonds were cut in Surat. Over the last decade diamond processing is now split between India and China:

Diamonds are cut and polished in Surat, India and the Chinese cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen. India in recent years has held between 19-31% of the world market in polished diamonds and China has held 17% of the world market share in a recent year.

Tippedcone (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

References

It's a bit unclear where exactly would you like this additional text? Please re-open the request with a reply exactly where this is best suited, thanks — Andy W. (talk) 05:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Diamond. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://pubsdc3.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b01327?journalCode=ancham
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110512061727/http://www.docstoc.com/docs/19770902/Crisis-Mitigation-at-De-Beers to http://www.docstoc.com/docs/19770902/Crisis-Mitigation-at-De-Beers
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130511045232/http://www.riotinto.com/whatweproduce/218_our_companies.asp to http://www.riotinto.com/whatweproduce/218_our_companies.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090930095856/http://www.argylediamonds.com.au/docs/gems_and_gemology.pdf to http://www.argylediamonds.com.au/docs/gems_and_gemology.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:57, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Splitting mining section

We have articles on gold mining and coal mining but nothing on diamond mining, apart from a redirect? Diamond mining is just as notable and worthy of its own article, with an extensive history and major significance to the modern world (see movies like Blood Diamond). Such an article would be a very interesting read. Laurdecl ^talk 22:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Such an article should be written, but the section on mining here is an appropriate length and an appropriate topic to cover here, and so the split tag is inappropriate. That content, as a summary of the larger issue, should remain here. DrKay (talk) 19:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2017

 đ

Template:SuAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined. 50.202.49.93 (talk) 14:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC) (づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:02, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

"Vital" articles held to different standards or none at all?

I notice that many "vital articles" are typically far longer and on average have far fewer citations and sources than most apparently not vital articles. Why is this? How is an article with larges amount of content apparently the original research or POV of the author given a pass for no sources when other articles of similar length would be ripped to pieces if every statement wasn't followed by a source link? Is the author of the article self-plagiarizing his or her own published work by including it un-sourced and un-cited in a Wikipedia article by paraphrasing or rearranging published work? And wouldn't that result in several serious and intentional violations of numerous Wikipedia principles, rules, conventions, practices etc etc etc?

I find it especially interesting when the subject of the article is usually some "common knowledge" subject or topic that literally thousands of published articles, books, papers, textbooks have been written about or included information about and they can be found with ease and by the dozens in any public library and most bookstores. In many cases they're not only "vital" but highly-rated articles and often are protected and can't be edited. In this instance, it's an article about diamond. Is there really a need for all the lengthy, unsourced and uncited passages? I think most chemistry textbooks probably lay out the basic facts about "diamond" in a single page with a few pictures.

I guess the thing I find most interesting is the edit protection. Clearly someone is asserting that the article as-is is as perfect as an article can be and is basically untouchable. Is that not taking ownership of an article? And how is declaring an article "off-limits" here on the "encyclopedia anyone can edit" not a flagrant conflict of interest and point of view violation? I get that there are ways around the TECHNICAL definitions of those things by having another editor copy-protect it for you but still, you're trying to own the article and keep it the way you like it and that's nothing but declaring it your property and putting a fence around it.

And when these articles turn out to have been authored by or at least authorship claims by editors and administrators with a real talent for using the "rule book" to revert, block and ban other editors for things like not citing sources or otherwise "vandalizing" articles with actual errors in them that of course can't ever be EDITED because you not only need a reliable secondary source for the edit but also have to successfully "disprove" the errors and THOSE sources, the net effect is that a handful of self-appointed "caretakers" of Wikipedia end up owning the damn thing.

That's okay. They can have it. Wikipedia hasn't succeeded in replacing any existing reference material and never will if its nothing but an index and links page for the rest of the internet. Good luck finding editors for that as more and more old-timers go the way of the do-do and fewer and fewer young people have any interest in being told they're incompetent, ignorant, incendiary or insane every time they see something wrong in Wikipedia or having something to add and just KNOW IT but have no idea how or ability to PROVE IT.