Diamonds are very expensive and the ladies are attracted to them. This much I know from first hand experience. Most men, as far as I can tell, have only a passing interest in the gemstone and a faint realization that they’re going to have to buy one (or at least a very convincing replica of one) at some point in the future for their significant other. But, from a physical standpoint, (as chemists, mind you) it’s hard not to be enamored by the crystal structure of diamond and the appreciation that its robustness is tempered by its thermodynamic instability – eventually that precious rock will be graphite – a fact jewelers are often not willing to consider when negotiating prices. There’s also the refractivity of the material that gives it a very appealing luster when cut properly. These cuts, some of which are in the public domain (like the “Princess cut”) and others which are very much not, create the responsible luster in an otherwise prosaic, transparent rock.

It was with interest then that I came across Toshikazu Sunada’s article in Notices (link) (I think it’s the Mathematical equivalent of C&E News) where he proposes, rather oddly, to create a crystal of equal brilliance by replicating two properties of diamonds – namely “very big symmetry” (?) and a “strong isotropic property” (not “isotropic” in the sense a crystallographer may use it.) So… he proposes a chiral structure. Naturally, when you’re going for maximum symmetry you instinctively reach for chirality. (??)

SmallerSmaller

Hmmm… I pulled those from the paper and added a few words to make it clear. I certainly hope it helped. Careful inspection of the right image (don’t get a headache) shows some seriously fucked up rings in there. To better illustrate them, I’ve pasted them below:

k4rings.png

Which produces a chiral crystal. Can this be made, Sunadad wonders to himself…. aloud… and in print… using JUST CARBON. He certainly seems to think this is possible. I’m… err… not so sure. The paper has his proposed chemical structure (with double bond) but I’m thinking it’s not going to happen. He’s a mathematician, so his fanciful structures are easily forgiven – and even then, I’m not going to say it’s impossible. But… I’m not going to say it’s possible either. So, for you materials chemists that get their jollies making crystals with fucked up properties, here’s something to go for. You’ll at least make a few mathematicians happy.

Thanks to Eximer, I discovered that Slashdot has comments and found one that’s actually useful to this discussion. I was happier before I realized Slashdot had comments.