3 ms·
Or consider iron. Almost all of it has actually sank into the Earth's core, the deposits we extract it from are but tiniest scraps of the metal left on the face
by Joker_vD 3y ago
Or consider iron. Almost all of it has actually sank into the Earth's core, the deposits we extract it from are but tiniest scraps of the metal left on the face of the planet. So irreverent!
- gravescale 3y agoAh well, but we could always get as much more of it as we want with an exciting enough mining project! And if that fails, just sit tight and it'll be most of the universe for a few quadrillion years, somewhere between "cold, dark and quiet" and "very cold and very dark and very quiet"
- acchow 3y agoWe could probably even make more iron in a fusion reactor. But anything heavier than iron would probably require a supernova.
- laurencerowe 3y agoI don't think there's anything stopping us from making trace amounts of elements heavier than iron. The superheavy elements have only been synthesised in the laboratory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheavy_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheavy_element
- namibj 3y agoWay easier to just electrolyze olivine, of which we have plenty. Downside is that you actually get more silicon and magnesium out of it, and those are higher strength each than the iron you get from each chunk of rock. I.e., if you wanted to use them to make a bridge, it'd be mostly of something like silicon fiber reinforced magnesium instead of steel. Unless refining them to sufficient purity turns out to be too difficult to be worth it.