Is a transparent metal possible? 

6 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Is a transparent metal possible? 

I don't know.

Wood is at the right energy level to absorb light, so it does, glass is not.

Not sure if you can modify that without changing the inherent properties of it.

You can see through gold leaf, but it isn't very robust.

 

31 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Is a transparent metal possible? 

Look at your smartphone, it's not glass your touching, it's indium tin oxide.

Edited December 19, 20178 yr by dimreepr

20 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Look at your smartphone, it's not glass your touching, it's indium tin oxide.

Look at a ruby; its aluminium oxide.

(and, like ITO, it's not a metal)

1 minute ago, John Cuthber said:

(and, like ITO, it's not a metal)

 

I differ to your expertise, but it does seem to be both...

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

Look at a ruby; its aluminium oxide.

(and, like ITO, it's not a metal)

Aluminum oxide without impurities is corundum, which is naturally transparent, and is sometimes used instead of glass.

21 minutes ago, EdEarl said:

Aluminum oxide without impurities is corundum, which is naturally transparent, and is sometimes used instead of glass.

It's a very useful material used, among other things for the pistons in high pressure pumps.

But it's still not a metal

4 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

I don't know.

Wood is at the right energy level to absorb light, so it does, glass is not.

Not sure if you can modify that without changing the inherent properties of it.

Neither of which is a metal. Metals have electrons in the conduction band, which allows them to respond to a wide spectrum of EM frequencies.

As others have implied, it's also an issue of thickness, because the attenuation depends on thickness. But the attenuation coefficient of a metal would be tend to be quite high for visible light.

Perhaps a 2d sheet of aluminum would be transparent; if that is possible.

Oh well, my dream of a tough but transparent knife is out the window I guess... Thanks guys... 

4 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Oh well, my dream of a tough but transparent knife is out the window I guess... Thanks guys... 

Metals have few valence electrons, which allows for metallic bonding and better than average conductivity... Metal oxides have their valence band filled and are very good insulators, metal oxides are in fact ceramics (like glass).

They do however make great magnets!

I believe Scotty made a large transparent aluminum fish tank to hold two whales in a Klingon cruiser.
This all happened in Star Trek iv : the Voyage Home, in which they travelled back in time to 1984.

So it should be available already.

Whilst the Beer-Lambert law is usually met in the context of the chemical analysis of solutions it applies more widely, and even to sound waves as well as EM radiation and ionising radiation (apha and beta particles).

https://teaching.shu.ac.uk/hwb/chemistry/tutorials/molspec/beers1.htm

 

So it depends what you mean by 'transparent'.

You also have to say transparent to to what.

It becomes a question of degree of absorbtion.

If you can make the metal thin enough it will pass a given % of the flux.

Conversely if you can make the window thick enough it will stop a given %.

 

+1 to John Cuthber, please listen to him about what is actually a metal, and you need to specify what state the metal is in.

There is some evidence that Hydrogen can be considered a metal.

 

 

Transparent in this context means you could make windows and clearly see with your eyes what is going on outside the window..  

Aluminium oxynitride is probably closest.

http://www.surmet.com/technology/alon-optical-ceramics/

Very mysterious origins, something about a Professor Scott and an exchange for plexiglass.

1 hour ago, Endy0816 said:

Aluminium oxynitride is probably closest.

http://www.surmet.com/technology/alon-optical-ceramics/

Very mysterious origins, something about a Professor Scott and an exchange for plexiglass.

Thanks Endy, I wonder how it's price stacks up against glass and plexiglass? 

19 hours ago, Butch said:

Metals have few valence electrons, which allows for metallic bonding and better than average conductivity... Metal oxides have their valence band filled and are very good insulators, metal oxides are in fact ceramics (like glass).

They do however make great magnets!

Wrong on practically  every count.

Manganese is one of the worst conducting metals, yet it has lots of valence electrons.

Silver, on the other hand is usually regarded as having just one, yet t's the best conductor.

 

The indium tin oxide referred to earlier is an oxide (not a metal) but it's quite a good conductor.

 

Not all metal oxides are ceramics.

From most conventional definitions, glass isn't a ceramic.

Some ceramics make  good magnets, but not all of them.

Similarly, some metals make good magnets, but not all of them.

 

Why did you post that stuff when you clearly know so little about it?

 

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

Wrong on practically  every count.

Manganese is one of the worst conducting metals, yet it has lots of valence electrons.

Silver, on the other hand is usually regarded as having just one, yet t's the best conductor.

 

The indium tin oxide referred to earlier is an oxide (not a metal) but it's quite a good conductor.

 

Not all metal oxides are ceramics.

From most conventional definitions, glass isn't a ceramic.

Some ceramics make  good magnets, but not all of them.

Similarly, some metals make good magnets, but not all of them.

 

Why did you post that stuff when you clearly know so little about it?

 

You are stating exceptions, I was stating general rules... Manganese is a poor conductor because it has many valence electrons(as I stated) "Metals have few valence electrons, which allows for metallic bonding and better than average conductivity..."

Indium tin oxide (ITO) is a ternary composition of indium, tin and oxygen in varying proportions. Depending on the oxygen content, it can either be described as a ceramic or alloy.

as an alloy it is a very good conductor due to few valence electrons and the relatively weak bond of those electrons to the structure. 

as a ceramic it is an insulator.

neither of these however is a metal... It is an oxygenated compound.

Edited December 20, 20178 yr by Butch

29 minutes ago, Butch said:

You are stating exceptions, I was stating general rules... Manganese is a poor conductor because it has many valence electrons(as I stated) "Metals have few valence electrons, which allows for metallic bonding and better than average conductivity..."

Indium tin oxide (ITO) is a ternary composition of indium, tin and oxygen in varying proportions. Depending on the oxygen content, it can either be described as a ceramic or alloy.

as an alloy it is a very good conductor due to few valence electrons and the relatively weak bond of those electrons to the structure. 

as a ceramic it is an insulator.

neither of these however is a metal... It is an oxygenated compound.

Your "general rules" are wrong. I cited specific examples that prove it.

 

And, since an alloy is a combination of metals, ITO isn't one.

Wiki has got it wrong

(and, BTW, you should have stated that you were copying what you wrote from WIKI.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium_tin_oxide

 

11 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Your "general rules" are wrong. I cited specific examples that prove it.

 

And, since an alloy is a combination of metals, ITO isn't one.

Wiki has got it wrong

(and, BTW, you should have stated that you were copying what you wrote from WIKI.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium_tin_oxide

 

I never trust wiki, most likely the information there was copied... I will see if I can pull up my source.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/indium-tin-oxideito-ellen-li

This is a manufacturer.

Whoever they are

They are wrong and

you should have cited them.

Incidentally, the links in the Linkedin page you gave as your source all point to WIKI.

To me that suggests that WIKI is the original, and your source is a copy.

Indium is a metal, so is tin, hence an alloy... or a ceramic if it is greatly oxygenated.

5 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Whoever they are

They are wrong and

you should have cited them.

Incidentally, the links in the Linkedin page you gave as your source all point to WIKI.

To me that suggests that WIKI is the original, and your source is a copy.

May we see your sources? All my sources say you are wrong.

I should note almost invariably when I have a point of contention with someone they will grab their phone and bring up a wiki, I will then challenge them to find a different source and usually I am right, however I am often wrong. If I had to pick a human trait as the most valuable, it would be humility... Humility allows us to learn.

47 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Your "general rules" are wrong. I cited specific examples that prove it.

 

And, since an alloy is a combination of metals, ITO isn't one.

Wiki has got it wrong

(and, BTW, you should have stated that you were copying what you wrote from WIKI.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium_tin_oxide

 

It is not a metal but it is metallic. Let's not use this forum for our petty argument... Ok? I give you the last word.

Steel if often called an alloy of iron and carbon, indeed in UK GCSE this is taught.

John may well be referring to a more advanced view that regards true alloys as occurring when there is a direct replacement of one atom for another in the solid lattice.

In the case of steel the carbon occupies interstitial vacancy sites in the iron (eg austenite) phase to form a solid solution of carbon in iron.

 

I don't know enough about the Indium-Tin-Oxygen system to comment.

4 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Thanks Endy, I wonder how it's price stacks up against glass and plexiglass? 

I'm reading either ~$10-15 per square cm or inch.

On the plus side you could have windows more expensive than many homes.