This is certainly good news for lasers. Many people don't realize how good diamonds are for this. Transparent with a 65% higher refractive index than glass, and 8x the thermal conductivity of copper. And completely scratch-proof!
Another story is the scratch-resistance. For that it would be sufficient to coat the surface of the lens with a thin layer of diamond. Which is done in several applications.
This is not sufficient?
But if it is true, then I'd say that sapphire is a poor choice for mobile phones. IME I'm far more likely to drop the phone, preferably on some form of hard surface, that to scratch it. Phones are nowadays so ridiculously big, that there's zero chance I'll have anything else in my pocket.
The difference between my watch (which was 4 years old at the time) and a colleagues almost brand new apple watch (without the sapphire) was really telling, is his was lightly scratched on the edges despite him being quite careful, and I was exceedingly reckless with mine as I considered it old- yet there was not a single defect.
That was a major reason for me to upgrade to the LTE of the next version of apple watch that I bought.
But there are other devices with better sapphire that actually live up to the hype.
I have now had watches for 10 years without issue and my phone displays seem to scratch.
I’m not doubting you’re correct, I never boight it for this reason, it was just an interesting retrospective observation. Clearly its working for me, and I’m not sure I have anything with gorilla glass.
Unless the Pixel 7 has it.
EDIT: My Pixel 7 does have gorilla glass indeed and it has two scratches on the display despite being extremely rarely used. (its my work phone and sits on my desk mostly)
Long story short, it is more scratch resistant but also more prone to break. So be careful.
Tiny replacable airbags, on the corners. Preferably it should somehow detect the elasticity of the surface its falling to or going to hit.
I suspect the edges are more at risk than the face, as I've struck the face very hard against the edge of a scaffolding pole and there was no damage - which, actually shocked me a lot based on the force.
[0] https://geology.com/minerals/photos/mohs-vickers-comparison-...
And it's not just key metal deposited on the screen, there are deep grooves cut into it.
Your brass keys should only be about 3.0, and gorilla glass a 9.0- you should be able to rub keys into brass dust all day long and not mark the screen.
I store my keys right in my pocket with my glass iPhone SE, and it doesn't have a mark on it.
I suppose it is possible you have keys with some weird material or coating, or as another poster suggested- maybe something like an abrasive dust got stuck on your key.
Typical keys are made from nickel plated hardened steel and nickelsilver. Considering the shiny coating is long gone and the keys are ferromagnetic, I assume it's the first. The keys are certainly hard enough to scrape my glass ceramic stove.
And reports online say that gorilla glass victus is the mist scratch prone gorilla glass, scratching at or around 6 already :/
My Pixel 4a, meanwhile, was in my pocket all the time and never got a scratch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2061:_Odyssey_Three?wprov=sfti...
Isn’t the layer caused by the former? For a given required refraction, isn’t the chromatic dispersion the same?
In complex lenses corrections can be made, but for a simple single eyeglass lens, how is chromatic dispersion affected by anything apart from simple refraction?
Edit: Achromotopsia
And, honestly, that would be really really cool.
Yeah, there are other materials with better refractive indices and that are tougher and cheaper and dont shatter. Sure.
But if we can get diamonds down to something that could be made into lenses for the (very high end) retail market, man, that would just be so cool!
Diamond layers within ICs to help get the heat out are being considered for future GPUs.[2] Again, it's not a magic bullet.
[1] https://www.diamond-materials.com/en/products/thermal-manage...
[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266638642...
They have the advantage of keeping a sharp edge for a much longer time than steel blades, but they cannot be sharpened again with simple tools and for some purposes it may be inconvenient that the zirconia blades cannot be made as thin as the best steel blades, due to the risk of breakage, and there are also less choices of blade forms, e.g. there are no bird's beak zirconia blades, which is the best shape for peeling and paring vegetables.
High-quality zirconia kitchen knives, like those made by Kyocera, are very pleasant to work with. Diamond blades could not feel much different, even if they should remain sharp for a longer time, but with a higher risk of breakage when mishandled.
Which shatters on contact with a small bone.
The meat without bones and also most vegetables can be handled by the currently existing ceramic kitchen knives and they could be handled by a diamond knife (though diamond, even in polycrystalline form, is much less tough than zirconia ceramic or silicon nitride ceramic, which are better suited for kitchen knives).
The only thing that beats it is single crystal boron arsenide which has some obvious downsides, being of course much more expensive and involving arsenic, which is considered a bad thing.
And with that, diamond is destined to be even cheaper than silicon, I think. Much more available and easier to purify, the hard part is rendering it into a crystal which is relatively solved.
but perhaps it's not that big of an issue, not sure.