back to article That 'DIAMOND SUPER EARTH' may actually be WORTHLESS ball of gas

A "diamond super Earth" discovered a year ago may not be anywhere near as valuable as previously suggested. A graduate student at the University of Arizona has examined data that appeared to point to the existence of a diamond-stuffed world circling 55 Cancri, a star which is 40 light-years away from Earth. Scientists at Yale …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

So it's more like moissanite planet then? Looks like diamond from a distance, but the closer you get, and the longer you look, the more apparent it becomes that it isn't, in fact, diamond but an imposter.

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

One for the Snatch fans - Inside the Pawn Shop

Saul : "It's a Moissanite "

Bad Boy : "A whatanite"

Saul : "Moissanite is an artificial diamond, it's Micky Mouse mate, it's spurious, not genuine and it's worth .......... Fuck all"

2
0
Silver badge

A moot observation

A planet that may or may not be made of diamonds 40 light years away....

By the time we develop the technology to get there diamonds will probably have no value anymore, the world will have been consumed by the Sun and if any human beings were lucky enough to have survived or moved on they will be more concerned about survival than making a dash to grab a hand full of stones.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Hey Mario!

Take those spades back to the shop for a refund...

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Worthless ball of gas eh

So another Rush Limbaugh then ..

2
2
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: Worthless ball of gas eh

"may not be anywhere near as valuable as previously suggested"

erm... seeing that the likelihood of reaching / mining the diamond was and still is as close to zero as makes no difference, I would say that it is exactly as commercially valuable as it was before i.e. zero.

And I bet that scientifically it's at least as valuable to study a non-diamond planet as a diamond one

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Worthless ball of gas eh

And I bet that scientifically it's at least as valuable to study a non-diamond planet as a diamond one

You've completely failed to account for the scientific bias of "Big Diamond" to a woman.

2
0
Silver badge

But based on what we know at this point, 55 Cancri E is more of a 'diamond in the rough'."

We don't know much unfortunately.

Also:

> Planet-sized mass of diamond, light-years away, near the star and buried under hundreds of kilometers of graphite

> Valuable

LOLNO

0
0

Not to mention that the diamond planet, if reachable, would send diamond prices crashing through the fucking floor if multiple companies got their grubby little mitts on it.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@moosh - actually no it wouldn't. Diamonds are only expensive because the release of gem quality diamonds onto the market is heavily restricted. There's a reason why De Beers execs are persona non gratia in the US - they operate a market rigging cartel.

If that planet turned out to be real and exploitable - the most likely outcome is someone like De Beers would buy the rights and then leave it alone - either that or the planet itself would suffer what's known as 'a regrettable incident'.

0
0
KPz

Fahrenheit?

Fahrenheit?

Seriously?

Hang your heads in shame, El Reg...

6
0
Yag

Re: Fahrenheit?

Is there a El Reg unit for temperature?

0
0

Re: Fahrenheit?

Is there a El Reg unit for temperature?

That would be 162.8889 Degree Hiltons.

Please make sure to Bookmark El Reg's Standards Converter.

3
0

Re: Fahrenheit?

Reply to my reply before the pedants arrive. That should be Degrees Hilton. Not Degree Hiltons.

2
0
KPz

Re: Fahrenheit?

Only crazy gun-totin', cousin-marryin' Yanks use Fahrenheit. The rest of the world uses Celsius, and strictly speaking, as this is a science article, Kelvin should be used.

Mind you, at these sorts of temperatures Celsius and Kelvin are pretty much interchangable.

4
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Re: Fahrenheit?

The rest of the world uses Celsius, and strictly speaking, as this is a science article, Kelvin should be used.

You are on El Reg Hilton is the correct usage. Although I agree that Kelvin should be added also, perhaps in brackets!

0
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Pah.

Diamondium...

0
0

Re: Pah.

Quit promoting your cheap Diamondillium, Wernstrom!

(As an aside, I think we need a Farnsworth icon. Would also be good for "I don't want to live on this planet anymore" moments.)

0
0

The planet may not be as "valuable" as previously thought? Are astronomists really this ignorant about what gives objects worth?

Even a 5 year old would understand why extraterrestrial entities have no value.

0
0
Bronze badge

Blame the messenger

I think you'll find when you read the article that the astronomist made no mention of worth; just the chemical composition. The journaler added that bit, to try and pump this non-story "grad student does some chemical analysis" into something bigger.

0
0
Bronze badge
Joke

We need that diamond planet...

...to mount on Larry Niven's ringworld

0
0
Bronze badge

Team?

"Johanna Teske, an astronomy PhD student, and her team "

What team? Despite naming three others, the link shows plenty of "I" but no "we".

Not entirely clear what the status of this research is; the suggestion in the link is that it is something of a work in progress and yet to be peer reviewed. It seems a bit unfair on the author to report this as fact at this stage.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums