Correction is healthy and benefits mankind long term, there was nothing good coming from ie impact on Africa. Nobody cared about that, so things are fixed from another direction.
Correction is healthy and benefits mankind long term, there was nothing good coming from ie impact on Africa. Nobody cared about that, so things are fixed from another direction.
They had immense value in ancient world. They were valued much more than gold - due to their rarity. Southern India was the only known source for mining diamonds in ancient world [1]. They were used as currency and was valued higher than gold. In fact there were wars fought for diamonds.
There is a saying about Koh-i-Noor, one of the most famous Diamond - "If a strong man were to throw four stones – one north, one south, one east, one west, and a fifth stone up into the air – and if the space between them were to be filled with gold, all would not equal the value of the Koh-i-Noor" [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golconda_diamonds
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/16/koh-i-...
All the gold available to humans on earth right now fits into a ~20m cube, and that is most certainly worth orders of magnitude more than a single diamond in a historical artifact.
> Who does not love diamonds? Where is there a mind in
> which the bare mention of them does not excite a
> pleasant emotion? Is there any one of rank too exalted
> to care for such baubles? The highest potentates of the
> earth esteem them as their choicest treasures, and
> kingdoms have been at war for their possession
From "Diamonds" by William Pole, published in 1861 [1] (27 years before the formation of the De Beers company)[1] https://www.google.com/books/edition/Diamonds/ENwOAAAAYAAJ?h...
This is why the Romans, e.g. Pliny the Elder, used for diamonds the name "Indian adamant". The name "adamant" without the "Indian" specifier had already been used for many hundreds of years (the oldest attestation is in Hesiod), but it had not been applied to a gem, but to nuggets of native osmium-iridium alloy, which can be found mixed with the nuggets of native gold in the alluvial deposits of gold (and which, unlike the gold with which they were mixed, could be neither melted nor forged, hence their name, "untameable"; "unconquerable", which is used in the article is a bad translation for "adamant").
Pliny the Elder described the "Indian adamant" as consisting of octahedral crystals, which is the most frequent form of the natural diamonds. It appears that at that time it was impossible to cut the diamonds, at most they might have been polished a little, so the crystals used in jewelry retained their native shape.
By the time of Pliny the Elder, the "Indian adamant" was the most expensive gem, surpassing even the noble opals, the pearls, the emeralds and the beryls, which were the next most expensive gems at that time. The Romans did not care much for transparent crystals, they appreciated much more the higher quality exemplars of noble opals or pearls, if those exhibited a nice play of colors.
The Crown Jewels disagree with you
https://www.hrp.org.uk/tower-of-london/history-and-stories/t...
Nile Red uses this approach to make Diamond Water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0wvDwSnzcw
* You might still lose the house if you opt for the bigger diamonds.
As they say, "If you want to know a diamond's worth, try selling one"
So for the iron alloys, which are the material most frequently processed by machining, diamond is not suitable. Other hard crystals, like alumina a.k.a. corundum, are much better for this purpose, even if they are less hard than diamond.
c-BN is isoelectronic with diamond; h-BN is isoelectronic with graphite (but is an insulator).