digg

Join DiggAbout

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

Superfluid Penetrates Glass!!! watch!

5min.com — Learn about liquid helium, the so-called superfluid, one of sciences most fascinating phenomenons. This fluid displays characteristics that are rare and amazing - just watch!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • archiegaff, on 12/13/2007, -187/+65min.com spam - watch it go popular at their command
    • akkibaba, on 12/13/2007, -1/+64How exactly does this wonderful video qualify as "spam"?
    • dn11, on 12/13/2007, -1/+47oh noes! you are being buried at their command!
    • themastersb, on 12/13/2007, -13/+4Things like Breitbart that just takes videos from elsewhere and posts it on their site is spam. This website is pretty much all original content.
      • linkin2, on 12/13/2007, -4/+10yea, all original content, hence the BBC logo...you dumbass, there is no such thing as "original content" on the internet.
        • DaffyDuck, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2Well, it would be original content if watched on the BBC website.
    • bitcloud, on 12/13/2007, -1/+25apparently youtube is the only video site allowed...

      suck on that corporate teet archie... suck it down... watch that revenue supermilk permeate your brain...
    • acephreak, on 12/13/2007, -1/+16Spam? I guess that superfluid company is gonna make millions out of this, right?
    • duckyinc, on 12/13/2007, -6/+1Even though this might now be spam you guys have to realize that most of what they are submit is, they've got a whole list of fake accounts why would they want them? for spam..
  • blynder, on 12/13/2007, -6/+278That's going on my list of things not to drink.
    • failsafex, on 12/13/2007, -20/+73that's what she said
      • TokenBlack, on 12/13/2007, -66/+6I dugg you down, well 'cause that's pretty ***** lame.
        • Dylson, on 12/13/2007, -5/+48I dugg you down because you responded to it.
          • Gir53457, on 12/13/2007, -16/+3I dugg you up and am making a lame comment that's really just overstating why it's funny in hopes of getting dugg up too, but ultimately dugg down because It's a pointless comment and I'm an idiot.
          • TokenBlack, on 12/13/2007, -15/+3I dugg you down because you can suck my balls.
          • IglooBurner, on 12/13/2007, -2/+10You think that you're too cool for school, but I have a newsflash for you, Walter Cronkite... you aren't.
        • Linkin4, on 12/13/2007, -13/+3I dugg you down because you're black, ahaha
    • jonohull, on 12/13/2007, -0/+88Me too. That video was too short. I would like to know more.
      • Markpdotcom, on 12/13/2007, -0/+16Its on the beeb tonight/tomorrow so I'll PVR it and up it somewhere, if theres enough interest :)
      • Iwantawii, on 12/13/2007, -0/+3Nimid posted this a ways below, but for those interested in knowing more:

        http://youtube.com/watch?v=9BntI1S7Tx8&feature=rel ...
        • Mizzike, on 12/13/2007, -0/+2The video in the original digg article is Absolute Zero 9 on YouTube. I checked Absolute Zero 10 on YouTube, but alas that was indeed the end of that fascinating part on liquid helium. However, the rest of the documentary is still fascinating.
        • Dugg2Death, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Wow thanks for that link, watched all 12 parts. More shows like this on tv could make it worth watching. Will never look at a Carrier air conditioner the same again.
      • Ramble, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2I can also PVR it tonight, if anyone has a particular favourite site I'd gladly upload.
    • dn11, on 12/13/2007, -3/+22looks like it would be a very effective laxative........ but that whole 2 degrees above absolute zero thing could give you some brain freeze
      • jtbandes, on 12/13/2007, -1/+1Looks more like the second you swallowed, it would be out the other end.
      • Motodog, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2Super *****!
    • Dylson, on 12/13/2007, -3/+1Nice.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/13/2007, -3/+3Yeah unless you want to drink it off the floor, because that's where it will be.
    • themastersb, on 12/13/2007, -1/+3I wonder what happens if someone touches it or if it stays in its super-liquid form once it's there so that I can have a water fountain that doesn't need electricity.
      • shark615, on 12/13/2007, -1/+7Minus the electricity required to cool it down to almost absolute zero. That shouldn't be to much though.
      • teh_techie, on 12/13/2007, -1/+5Hmm, if you touch it, you'd freeze your fingers pretty good! Liquid Helium would be colder than anything you've likely touched in your life...
    • OpticalLiam, on 12/13/2007, -1/+4Yeah, this stuff just goes right through you!
    • Frostman3D, on 12/13/2007, -2/+29Can you imagine taking a super piss?
      • vulapine, on 12/13/2007, -2/+15"Oh No! It's going through he porcelain! Now it's climbing out! RUN!"
    • ItsMyWii, on 12/13/2007, -3/+2Really? It's going on my list of things TO drink.
  • Dokument, on 12/13/2007, -7/+43so what do they keep it in?
    • lobbster, on 12/13/2007, -17/+12stuff with a lid?
      • Zithe, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4I don't know why they are digging you down. The liquid wasn't actually passing through the solid, it was leaking up and over the edges, so you are correct.
    • SenatorPenguin, on 12/13/2007, -2/+24They normally don't store it in superfluid form, but the only way to contain it is inside a completely sealed glass or nonporous container.
    • Magnj, on 12/13/2007, -1/+79I'll go out on a limb and suggest that it is probably not generally stored at 2 degrees above absolute zero, and that this "problem" only arises when scientists want to play.
    • nullx42, on 12/13/2007, -20/+228In the palm of chuck norris' fist
      • vuke69, on 12/13/2007, -21/+6The bible thumpin' fist, or the bible holdin' fist?
        • daliminator, on 12/13/2007, -5/+39THE FIST THAT KILLS YOU.
        • IllBeBack, on 12/13/2007, -5/+1"My turn to teach..." And then Chuck kicks the ***** out of you.
      • MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -23/+2***** Chuck. Funny comment otherwise. I suggest we replace all Chuck Norris jokes with technoviking jokes.
        • Iwantawii, on 12/13/2007, -3/+6You're just jealous that he can divide by zero and you can't.
      • Bullsnot, on 12/13/2007, -4/+19I thought that meme was long dead and over, but I chuckled when I read it, so I had to dig.
        • nksoccer13, on 12/13/2007, -3/+2Chuck Norris will never die
          • dondara, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2Yes he will. Even Chuck can't beat entropy.
      • busybenj, on 12/13/2007, -2/+1Thanks for the laugh nullx. Classic.
    • trogdoor, on 12/13/2007, -10/+6A glass container that doesn't contain small pors ( see: holes ) in it. Sensationalist titles FTW!
      • jacquesm, on 12/13/2007, -1/+10no glass will do then... glass is amorphous, the pores are always going to be there, it just depends on how small the particles of the fluid are. For this reason iodine is stored in crystal flasks with crystal stoppers because the iodine molecules are small enough to migrate through the pores in glass, but too large to cross the crystal lattice.

        • noloveIII, on 12/13/2007, -3/+5It isn't the pores that cause the leaking it is the ability of superfluid helium to creep up the sides of containers due to its lack of viscosity
          • trogdoor, on 12/13/2007, -3/+12It's both.
          • Iwantawii, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4Well being a superfluid it has 0 viscosity, so it's not going to bead up like water or oil (high viscosity) would and resist flowing through very very small openings (pores). Where rocks in a wicker basket are like fluid in a glass container, sand in a wicker basket is like superfluid in a glass container.
          • djbon2112, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1I was originally going to say exactly that when I first saw the title, but the video clearly shows leaking out the bottom, so yes it is both.
      • jwiesenborn, on 12/13/2007, -9/+13wrong place, digg me down plz kthx
    • WaterDragon, on 12/13/2007, -3/+2they keep it in a magnetic bottle -- same as anti-matter
  • davymac, on 12/13/2007, -26/+189penetrates glass? i thought they said it went around it..
    • ozid, on 12/13/2007, -18/+3it breaks through the beaker. but the bottom and the top were two pieces, as far as I understand.
    • sn0w, on 12/13/2007, -14/+7You're right, davymac. It _looks_ as though it penetrates it, but it flows over the rim of the container.
      • RedRummy, on 12/13/2007, -0/+46it flows _through_ porous ceramic (unglazed glass) but can also flow over the rim.
    • manicleek, on 12/13/2007, -0/+87The first beaker had a slightly porus bottom that could hold normal fluids, but superfluids soaked through. The second beaker had the superfluid climbing up its walls and down the outside of the glass.
    • bigsteve, on 12/13/2007, -11/+2It is "climbing" the inside of the glass due to its lack of viscosity. This should be buried as inaccurate.
      • rarson, on 12/13/2007, -1/+1I don't think you understand what viscosity is.
        • bigsteve, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2I don't, but luckily for me there's google. I was quoting what (I thought) the man in the video said.
        • rarson, on 12/14/2007, -1/+1How about not posting ***** out your ass? Or should we just bury you as inaccurate? Hypocrite.
  • Dokument, on 12/13/2007, -27/+207Also it doesnt penetrate glass. it just defies gravity.
    • Magnj, on 12/13/2007, -3/+88just
    • chrillen, on 12/13/2007, -8/+3Just? That's a pretty cool feat.
    • EndersGame, on 12/13/2007, -0/+47Either way the glass loses.
    • zeromancer, on 12/13/2007, -2/+7i can do both.
    • j4200, on 12/13/2007, -0/+24Right. It flows through porous ceramic. Though it does not defy gravity. It is gravity combined with the siphon effect that leads super fluids over the rim of their containers. These are usually also in cases of 0 atmospheric pressure since it is near absolute zero temperatures.
      • Philbert, on 12/13/2007, -4/+10This actually starts to happen with just regular water. If you lok at the side of a very still glass od water you can see the water is not totally flat across the surface. Near the walls of the glass it starts to climb up.
        • Daniel15, on 12/13/2007, -0/+12That's called a "meniscus" I think? Something I actually remembered from Chemistry at high school :P
        • maffiou, on 12/13/2007, -0/+9Isn't that surface tension ?
        • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -0/+8That's the Meniscus, with normal fluids, it's fairly small because of the viscosity, but with superfluids, the zero viscosity allows the meniscus to continually climb.
        • UTKEngineer, on 12/13/2007, -3/+7It is called a meniscus and it's caused by osmotic pressure.
          I'm also gonna go out on a limb and say the video is misleading at the least. No fluid truly has zero viscosity. It can only have a viscosity so low that viscous effects are dwarfed by the other terms in the equation of motion.
          I also take issue with the fountain that never stops bit. That would be perpetual motion, which doesn't exist. I'm assuming you have to impose a temperature gradient to obtain that behavior.
          • Angostura, on 12/13/2007, -1/+4The meniscus has nothing to do with osmotic pressure - but thanks for playing.
          • slicerace, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4Also, it's a superfluid, so it has zero viscosity and zero entropy, like how a superconductor has zero resistance. It isn't "misleading" to say that it has zero viscosity when it does. Also, you can't form a temperature gradient in a superfluid.
          • UTKEngineer, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4No. Even superfluids have viscosity. It may well be so low as to be minimal, but it has a viscosity. If it truly had a zero viscosity, any shear applied would result in an infinite fluid velocity.
            Superfluids also have entropy, most often approximated as : S = 1.5838 (T/Tl)5.6 (where Tl is the lamba temp).
            Also, you're right. It wasn't a temperature gradient that fueled the spout, but instead a light incident in the reservoir.

            I was wrong about osmotic pressure. Should have said capillary forces. My apologies.
    • Archeologist, on 12/13/2007, -11/+3Chuck Norris..
    • JoeCool1986, on 12/13/2007, -1/+8No, it does both. Watch the video again.
      • GoatBn, on 12/13/2007, -3/+1no, when it falls through the glass, it is not true glass. It is a superfine porus surface.
    • thebusdriver, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1wrong, there were 2 beakers. It went through one of em. Please watch the video.
  • mishsquish, on 12/13/2007, -7/+77Well isn't glass just an inferior solid incapable of holding superior fluids?!
    • NoRCoN, on 12/13/2007, -13/+9‽
    • Philbert, on 12/13/2007, -8/+30Who says glass is solid?
      • NiNiCraftOne, on 12/13/2007, -12/+6ya, glass is liquid so really it's like one liquid flowing through another.
      • smurfsahoy, on 12/13/2007, -10/+28Science? Glass IS a solid. The glass being a super viscous liquid thing is a myth. The only reason old windows are thicker at the bottom is because they manufactured them imperfectly back then, and purposefully installed any thicker parts on the bottom because it was more stable that way. If you find an old, poorly built house, someitmes the glass will be thickest on the side or the top, cause they screwed up.

        There have also been experiments with weights tied to glass rods for years and years with no change in curvature.

        Pitch, however, IS a liquid that flows over the course of years. One of the longest running experiments on record is a glass of pitch dripping into another glass, with each drip taking about 10 years.
        • Shiner6, on 12/13/2007, -0/+15Each drip taking about 10 years? That's worse than watching paint dry.
        • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -2/+13It's not so much that it's a myth, it's more about differing theories.
          Due to the qualities it shows, you can justify either answer. Most people simply suggest that saying it's super-cooled is a problematic answer that needs much more research, and thus, should be avoided.
      • chogie, on 12/13/2007, -1/+6http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Glas ...
      • Mirag3, on 12/16/2007, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_solid
    • demodawid, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Stop being such a glassist.
    • sensoukami, on 12/15/2007, -0/+1Glass is a liquid...
  • theMurdocVolta, on 12/13/2007, -25/+100Inaccurate: It doesn't actually penetrate the glass

    Yet its still pretty damn fascinating.
    • koft, on 12/13/2007, -1/+34What part of a liquid with a viscosity of 0 penetrating a porous container do you not understand?
      • Hamletlere, on 12/13/2007, -11/+8What part of "porous, unglazed ceramic bottom" to the beaker do you not understand? Ceramic is not glass, hence it did not penetrate glass.
        • koft, on 12/13/2007, -2/+14It's still glass. Ceramic describes a range of materials, one of which is glass, and it's clearly glass in the video.
          • Ramble, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2Glass is an amorphous structure, it is not a ceramic.
          • Mirag3, on 12/16/2007, -0/+1Wrong - "The term covers inorganic non-metallic materials which are formed by the action of heat." That includes glass. I think its time to take chem 101 again.
      • Pureeviljester, on 12/13/2007, -2/+6depends if glass is usually porous..
      • Angostura, on 12/13/2007, -3/+3That wasn't a glass container it was penetrating. The glass isn't porous.
  • HenkPoley, on 12/13/2007, -6/+122It doesn't penetrate glass. It penetrates a ceramic. Which is more porous than glass.
    • gerryk, on 12/13/2007, -4/+1It's not a ceramic, it's unglazed pottery... not anywhere near the same thing
    • holeymoley, on 12/13/2007, -0/+6The bottom of the vessel is sintered glass, not really ceramic, but it is a porous glass product that if manufactured with small enough pores can hold a liquid that isn't forced through. Normally these sintered glass funnels are used for filtering where a vacuum is applied to the bottom to force the liquid through and leave the particulates behind. Since the superfluid has no viscosity to hold it on one side of the sintered glass, no pressure (or vacuum) is needed to push it through. Gravity is enough.
  • diktator279, on 12/13/2007, -13/+448So, lots of things penetrate glass: rocks, bricks...
    • tyywebb, on 12/13/2007, -2/+7I know there's a 5th grade joke here somewhere...
      • fwc67, on 12/13/2007, -1/+17the question is, could this penetrate a woman

        there it is..
    • MrSidnet, on 12/13/2007, -1/+8umm, I think that was it.
    • jimmick, on 12/13/2007, -8/+32No, bricks don't penetrate glass
      People with bricks penetrate glass
      • ukblacknight, on 12/13/2007, -2/+25fail. you're implying people go through the glass with the brick.
        • bwa236, on 12/13/2007, -1/+9superglue
        • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -0/+6But that does happen. I'm going out on a limb, but I think some people are stupid enough not to let go of said brick.
        • Angostura, on 12/13/2007, -2/+4Fail. You missed the joke.
      • Awasaki, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2yea u have to say people throw bricks that then penetrate the glass
        • fotbr, on 12/13/2007, -0/+7Or just use a tornado. Then people aren't required at all.
      • emalen, on 12/13/2007, -0/+28It's a gun law joke. Jeez people.
      • l33tone, on 12/13/2007, -3/+1People with bricks don't penetrate glass, the Government with bricks penetrate glass. KOTH FTW.
      • thejuggernaut11, on 12/13/2007, -1/+9Bricks don't penetrate glass.
        Dangerous minorities with bricks penetrate glass.
    • acephreak, on 12/13/2007, -17/+4I like penetrating. Apparently, I also enjoy getting dugg down.
    • _skin_, on 12/13/2007, -4/+1My fist! Highya!
    • Wormfather, on 12/13/2007, -2/+3There is no brick.
    • whatsupimphil, on 12/14/2007, -1/+2Not so well on an Audi
  • TailsTheMan, on 12/13/2007, -12/+22 degrees above absolute zero? I'm gonna be seeing that soon.
  • Tyrghast, on 12/13/2007, -12/+4why must i always watch things submitted by mark1?
  • iPissExcellence, on 12/13/2007, -11/+1holy water?
  • AzMegladon, on 12/13/2007, -28/+1Fake!
  • ozid, on 12/13/2007, -3/+27Does ceramic = glass? (seriously)

    I'm under the impression that the bottom of the beaker and the beaker itself are two different pieces... but thats cool none-the-less.
    • UTKEngineer, on 12/13/2007, -1/+4No, ceramic isn't the same as glass.
      • egyan, on 12/13/2007, -0/+2Glass is a type of ceramic.
        • UTKEngineer, on 12/13/2007, -0/+2Glass is a type of ceramic, yes.

          However, glass is not porous. So, the "unglazed, porous ceramic" on the bottom of the beaker is NOT glass. Long story short, the liquid did not penetrate the glass. Inaccurate headline.
  • redxninja, on 12/13/2007, -2/+98science rules.
    • FinalSight, on 12/13/2007, -3/+55Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill...
      • Extraneous, on 12/13/2007, -0/+29Inertia is a property of matter!
      • phazonsuit07, on 12/13/2007, -0/+11t-minus seven seconds!
      • gommle, on 12/13/2007, -1/+16Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers...
    • provost, on 12/13/2007, -1/+3creationism can explain everything in this video. I will call a local church and report back.
    • had3l, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1Meh, that is nothing compared to the Bose-Einstein condensate state though. Go watch the whole documentary.
  • takeo1775, on 12/13/2007, -19/+4Frictionless fountain? isnt that impossible
    • trogdoor, on 12/13/2007, -1/+8No, why would it be?
      • bobcrotch, on 12/13/2007, -2/+11Great explanation Doctor Science
        • noloveIII, on 12/13/2007, -0/+6It is because Helium 4 at 2K has no viscosity so friction never slows down its flow.
        • trogdoor, on 12/13/2007, -1/+3I hoped it would bring about the sort of epiphany that one gets when they ask "what came before the big bang" where you really question why you believe something is not possible, like why it is so hard for us to wrap our minds around the idea that there was no "before" time.
          • Feanor, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4Clearly there is, it even has a Land, filled with Dinosaurs.
    • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1It's impossible when using normal liquids. But not entirely impossible, as shown in the video.
    • shark615, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1Not in a vacuum or near vacuum which is what is required to get the temp low enough to make this liquid
    • Tunguska, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Does that not mean the device could be a perpetual motion device, especially when the helium is cooled by natural means?
  • DarkTranquility, on 12/13/2007, -1/+24That was ***** awesome... 0% viscosity ...I thought it was impossible, guess I was wrong.
    • bejayel, on 12/13/2007, -2/+1We need a way to use this for ***** like...engines. Imagine a frictionless engine. It'll never happen. As if internal combustion is the best engine we can come up with for cars and trucks after this many years.
      • DarkTranquility, on 12/13/2007, -0/+2I think what you're saying theoretically is a good idea but since its 0% it could go anywhere...I think the novel idea here is how to CONTROL the viscosity at a manufacturer level.
    • jimmiss, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2People only think about that sort of stuff when they're high.
  • maja742, on 12/13/2007, -0/+45i need more of that video
  • ferrariman60, on 12/13/2007, -1/+82ZERO VISCOSITY?!?!?!! WHAT!!! That is awesome. Crazy stuff.
    • EBFoxbat, on 12/13/2007, -1/+140W-0 ... the best oil for winter driving.
  • TheNatMan, on 12/13/2007, -13/+29Anybody else see a boob?
  • drakia, on 12/13/2007, -0/+31I know this'll probably sound stupid. But how did they get it to almost absolute zero so quickly?
    • Chaostician, on 12/13/2007, -0/+13evaporative cooling
    • Havs, on 12/13/2007, -0/+27Evaporation is a phase change. The resultant energy loss produces a cooling effect. Just like how sweat cools you when it evaporates.
    • Anomaly427, on 12/13/2007, -1/+20Why do you assume it was much above that to start? I assumed it was almost there. As it boils off it loses the remaining heat quickly.
  • over90000, on 12/13/2007, -0/+47Anyone know what the name of the documentary is? I would like to watch the whole thing.
  • karlhouser, on 12/13/2007, -2/+34Gooooooooooooooo SCIENCE!
  • loganarcher, on 12/13/2007, -21/+9By superfluid they mean me and by glass they mean Heidi Klum.
  • Blakestone, on 12/13/2007, -9/+150% viscosity? That would make one heck of a lube... kinda cold though.
    • ozid, on 12/13/2007, -1/+59I'm sure liquid nitrogen would be a great lube too for about .00^9999 of a second. Then your pen0r shatters and cuts through vagina like Reality TV through the souls of Americans.
    • SLockhart, on 12/13/2007, -1/+5No it wouldn't you need viscosity for lubrication.
      • noloveIII, on 12/13/2007, -0/+14No, you need viscosity hence friction for sensation, zero viscosity is great to lucbricate, but pointless for the purpose of sex.
        • e144539, on 12/14/2007, -1/+2No you need viscosity period. Viscosity of oil is higher than that of water, viscosity of grease, is greater than oil...
          In general the higher the viscosity, the better the lubricant.

          Haven't you seen Castroil commercials? They claim protection from "viscosity breakdown"
    • teh_techie, on 12/13/2007, -2/+8Lube?... What the hell you need that ***** for? Stop bangin' old grannies that can't produce their own...
  • hadak, on 12/13/2007, -0/+7Where can I find out more? (besides wikipedia.)
  • Lane, on 12/13/2007, -1/+12I wonder how much energy is expended by getting this/keeping it at 2 above absolute zero
  • Dan11023, on 12/13/2007, -10/+11I have no idea whats going on.


    No wonder I failed chem
  • cg06vx, on 12/13/2007, -2/+17So its basically an ideal space environment lubricant?
    • bigpete591, on 12/13/2007, -2/+13Why are you being buried?
      Seems like a pretty reasonable question. The temperature of empty space is around 2.7K so it would take almost no energy to maintain a 0% viscosity lubricant.
      • slicerace, on 12/13/2007, -0/+22.7K is hot compared to the 1.7-2.1K where the lambda point of helium is. Cryogenics is very difficult -- even if you had this as a lubricant, the zero viscosity would cause it to escape the mechanics of whatever machine it is you are trying to lubricate. Helium is also expensive compared to other lubricants -- it's like $500 for a 100 L cannister of L He.
    • EBFoxbat, on 12/13/2007, -0/+12No, superfluids have all sorts of other odd and very-much not understood properties. Plus it conducts electricity (very well).

      The interesting thing to think about is how if it were used as a lube, with perfectly zero viscosity, it would never heat up from friction.
    • l33tone, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4Thermal output from whatever satellite / space station / probe / other device. Background radiation, which is present pretty much anywhere (which yes you can shield against but then the shielding gets warmer). These factors prevent you from just dumping liquid helium out the airlock and having it stay liquid. Doesn't mean it's impossible to have liquid helium in space, you can, but you would still have to have a cooling system. As for using it as a lubricant, maybe, but any moving parts that are exposed to those kind of temperatures would be made rather brittle.
    • flibz, on 12/13/2007, -3/+1huh-huh huh-huh you said lubricant huh-huh huh-huh
  • arcooke, on 12/13/2007, -1/+58This video cut off way too early..
  • Lacero, on 12/13/2007, -9/+6headline buried as inaccurate.
  • patho, on 12/13/2007, -11/+60Buried, this story is superfluous.
  • skyfyre, on 12/13/2007, -9/+3Maybe it'll power the flying car.
  • HoboMaster, on 12/13/2007, -21/+2My superfluid penetrated your mom.
    • RonBurgundy76, on 12/13/2007, -0/+3Obviously it wasn't your wit that charmed her.
  • Pelapp, on 12/13/2007, -1/+435min.com is doing a suspiciously good job of getting on the frontpage of Digg almost everyday...
  • XThunderStormX, on 12/13/2007, -15/+0DEFY TeH NEWTONS!?!? OH NOES! its t3h M.J.'s "Secret Stuff" from SPACE JAM

    KITTY DOES NOT WANT
    • Dylson, on 12/13/2007, -1/+7LOL HAI I R HERE TO TELL U NOT 2 DO DAT NYMORE

      KTHX BAI!
    • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1CAPSLOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!
      BUT YOU STILL NEED TO STEER!
  • skeptic42, on 12/13/2007, -1/+14It's a T-1000.
  • camiloteram, on 12/13/2007, -0/+8Full episode needs to be on stage 6 asap
    • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -2/+1Stage 6 never works for me at college...
  • trogdoor, on 12/13/2007, -0/+28The first part of the entire documentary on youtube ( follow the links to the rest ):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BntI1S7Tx8
  • justinp, on 12/13/2007, -1/+4Take that, glass!
  • niklastj, on 12/13/2007, -1/+3http://www.mininova.org/search/?search=bbc+zero
  • chaos7, on 12/13/2007, -1/+2definite digg!
  • ricerfuel, on 12/13/2007, -1/+5http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/feature ...
  • HumanRecall, on 12/13/2007, -9/+1How did it penetrate it , are they BLIND !!...the 1940's black and white video clearly shows the helium or whatever chemical reaction BREAK/CRACK the bottom of the glass - hence anything would leak out at that moment !

    Check 1:02/1.44 into the video for the proof !

    Gee good thing they never pissed in the cup in 2007 it would be classified as supper pee !! When in fact it was the glass holding was breached -of course than any liquid m,material would leak through it DUH !!
    • RonBurgundy76, on 12/13/2007, -0/+4Go forth and study this a little more. Then come back here and post when you understand what you are talking about. Also, take a typing class and a spelling class. Thanks :)
      • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1You assume he's smart enough to do research.
    • retral, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1What's this guy going on about?
    • raid517, on 12/17/2007, -0/+1He thinks he's a genius - when secretly he's just a retard.
  • tnatharik, on 12/13/2007, -0/+2This is from BBC absolute zero.Cool Documentary.
    • rgaino, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1Was the pun intended? If so, good job.
  • fcukbush, on 12/13/2007, -0/+10For people in the UK (or anyone who can get BBC 4) the whole documentary is on BBC 4 tonight from midnight 'till 2 am
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/feature ...
    • JeFurry, on 12/13/2007, -0/+6That's the second REALLY USEFUL reply I've seen in this thread! My hat is off to you, sir/madam!
  • sriel, on 12/13/2007, -0/+16This is the way urban myths are born; inaccurate titles and people who don't watch the video.
    There isn't passing any superfluid through glass the entire video.
    First beaker has a ceramic bottom it leaks through, second beaker it crawls along the glass surface over the edge.
    All very cool, but there isn't any glass being penetrated.
    • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -3/+2So explain the difference between leaking through and penetrating. In this case, they're simply synonyms.

      The poster probably used penetrating to get all the pervs to click on it.
      • slicerace, on 12/13/2007, -0/+3Ugh - do you even read before responding? He said it leaks through the ceramic container. This is the same thing is penetrate in this context. The glass, however, does now allow the superfluid to leak through/penetrate it. It is not as porous as the ceramic. Instead, the superfluid helium climbs out along the glass surface over the edge of the beaker and back down where it forms the droplet. Why do you need an explanation of the difference if you then say, "In this case, they're simply synonyms." Wouldn't that mean that there is no difference? The point he's making is that in the case of the glass, the fluid climbs over it instead of going through it; I don't see how this is hard to grasp.
    • flibz, on 12/13/2007, -1/+1huh-huh huh-huh you said penitrated huh-huh huh-huh
  • lickmyback, on 12/13/2007, -0/+17From the Wikipedia article on super fluids:

    "Recently, superfluids have been used to trap and slow the speed of light. In an experiment, performed by Lene Hau, light was passed through a superfluid and found to be slowed to 17 meters per second (normally 299,792,458 meters per second)."

    .....!
    • MJDub, on 12/13/2007, -0/+7Super Fluid = the real flux capacitor?
  • timothydonohue, on 12/13/2007, -2/+2it didn't go through glass, which is solid. it went through something porous, which is like a sieve. it doesn't do it when it's boiling (which it does at low temperature, obviously, because it would much rather be a gas than a liquid) because it moves around too much for there to be enough time to fall through the holes.. but, at low temp the motion between molecules slows enough that it can no longer boil. so, it sits there, like any other non boiling liquid. then it goes through the holes in the sieve. not a mystery. just cold gas, lol
    • drakenlot, on 12/13/2007, -4/+2Moron.
      Glass is normally porous, it only seems solid because very few molecules of fluids are small enough to go through the pores. Why do you think you regular glass isn't the greatest insulator?
    • ThuggishLuigi, on 12/14/2007, -1/+0F.Y.I. Glass is not a solid. It is actually a very slow moving liquid. That is why at an old house, the glass at the bottom of the windows is slightly thicker than the top.
  • Fastfuud, on 12/13/2007, -1/+7Too bad we are running out of helium
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.08/helium.htm ...
    • HerbSolo, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1meh - just set off an H-Bomb.
    • Twee, on 12/16/2007, -0/+1There are 100 million tons of Helium-3 on the moon that George Bush wants to get at, because it has enough energy potential to power the earth for the next 1000 years.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 94 of 94 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.